07/05/2008
NEWS STORY
Should you be so inclined - and I know I am - you may well have come to the conclusion that Leafield is cursed. After all, the Super Aguri outfit's British HQ was formerly home to Arrows, which withdrew from the 2002 Formula One World Championship just over half-way through the season.
It is always sad to see an F1 team go under, and in my time I have seen many great names 'disappear' from the sport. However, whereas teams like Brabham and Lotus were sad, pale shadows of their former selves and we were glad to see them put out of their misery, Super Aguri (like Minardi before them) had something, a certain passion, that was a joy to behold. We all have a place for the under-dog.
Now, in a year in which we were promised twelve teams, we are down to ten, with Dietrich Mateschitz seeking a buyer for Toro Rosso. We have a multi-billionaire at Force India but how long before Vijay Mallya 'gets it'? It's all very well boasting about the team's "first top 10 finish" and using the argument that in 2007 (as Spyker) "regular top 12 finishes were something of a rarity", but is this really the yardstick by which he judges his outfit's progress? Yes, Force India is improving, but it is going to take a serious step forward, and consequently a massive increase in budget, if the team is to regularly challenge for points, far less podiums. And if it isn't the aim of Force India - or indeed any other team - to score points and podiums, why are they in F1?
Despite the cost cutting, teams are struggling to survive, then again, this doesn't stop them splashing out on ever more ridiculous hospitality units, and pouring countless millions into aerodynamic research that will be redundant in just a few months.
Super Aguri was founded on the premise that Honda needed a berth for Takuma Sato after dumping him in favour of Rubens Barrichello. However, when you think about this it was madness. Creating an F1 team merely to keep a driver's fans (albeit consumers and thereby customers) happy has to be the most ludicrous thing ever, especially when one considers that having now left him high and dry these fans will be more angry with Honda than if they'd never created Super Aguri in the first place. Furthermore, whatever one's view on the way Honda has acted, the fact is that Toyota - with the assistance of Williams - has the only Japanese driver on the grid. How will that go down at Fuji in October?
Fact is we have lost Super Aguri, but where do we go from here? Should F1 allow customers cars or should we allow some teams to field three or even four cars? Then again, should we be making it easier for new teams to enter F1, after all, with the planet facing a financial crunch - not to mention environmental issues - how long will certain manufacturers stick with the sport?
Some will say that Aguri Suzuki was a dreamer, much like Gian Carlo Minardi, Paul Stoddart and others before him. But then, isn't that what makes sport, and especially our sport, so magical... the power of dreams? Now where have I heard that line before?
In our latest Talking Point, we want your opinion on who is to blame for the loss of Super Aguri, what lessons can be learned (if any) and where the sport goes from here. However, please remember, we're looking for reasoned debate and not the slagging off of certain individuals or companies.
Chris Balfe
Editor
To send your thoughts, click here
Note: Please include your full name - without a full valid name we will not publish your entry.
Christian Carlsson - Amal - Sweden
As an old amateur sportscar racer I truly believe that the customer car issue is the main reason for the decline of entries in todays F1 world.
Just how many of all the guys that was thinking of applying for the "twelfth slot" were actually thinking of building their own car?
And why just limit the field to 12?
I really miss the time when pre-qualifying was just as exciting as the actual race (which was a lot more exciting than today's race!).
Please give the RACERS (= dreamers) the chance to compete with customer items!
BTW, isn't the engines that are of use today a customer item?
Gregor Veble - Slovenia
The loss of the Super Aguri team is one of the saddest things to have happened in recent F1 history. The last team that fully disappeared from the field was Arrows, whose assets the Super Aguri team picked up and put to good use during the two and a bit seasons that their F1 participation lasted. During this rather short time, the team became almost every F1 fan's favourite underdog. I don't think there were many F1 die-hards that did not cheer for Takuma Sato when overtaking the McLaren of Fernando Alonso on merit during the closing stages of the Canadian Grand Prix of 2007 on his way to a fine 6th place.
It was, however, their first year miracles that really stand out. In a few short months they took an almost obsolete Arrows chassis, adapted it to the regulations and actually managed to go racing with it on time. While dead last at the start of the season, their lack of performance was not nearly as bad as many of the backmarker teams of seasons past, and by the time the F1 circus reached Brazil they could comfortably keep pace with the rest of the grid. In an old Arrows chassis. It has to be stressed.
In their first year, they could be considered a proper F1 constructor as much as any other team on the grid. They worked off the old Arrows assets, but the same can be said of any other team (e.g. BMW) who took over an existing team. If anything, Super Aguri had an even tougher task than most as they merely obtained some assets but not a complete team structure.
It was also around this time that Max and Bernie decided that having customer car teams will be the way forward. In that climate, investing into infrastructure to build a new car from scratch simply made no sense. Since Red Bull already found a way around the then current Concorde agreement as far as constructors go, it made sense for Super Aguri to rather rely on a Honda chassis. In the eyes of many, the respect for the team dropped a bit with that decision, but the improved
performance more than made up for it. While a large part of the performance improvement can indeed be attributed to them having a better baseline to start from, it should be noted that the aerodynamic development of the chassis was done by Super Aguri themselves, they were hardly just a customer.
The trouble started when their main sponsor SS United failed to pay up. This resulted in a gradual drop off in relative performance, seeing that the money could not be used for any performance gains but merely to cover the running costs. And then the whole customer car idea slowly began to disintegrate, with the Williams and Force India/Spyker/Midland teams rightly being concerned about it. This reduced the value of the Super Aguri team significantly. Factor in the current economic downturn and it becomes obvious why possible investors might have turned away at the last minute.
The main contributing factor to the Super Aguri demise is most likely the poor governance of the sport. By first giving the promise of the possibility of customer cars and then pulling it back, it sent Super Aguri down the wrong path, devaluing it in the process. It also can't have helped that, after the expiry of the Concorde agreement, a new one still hasn't been agreed upon.
The decision to scrap the customer car idea must have also weighed in on continued Honda support. Under the original idea, having two teams on the grid would have given Honda more political power for the cost of merely producing a few more chassis. Supporting two teams building two different cars, however, makes little sense.
What makes even less sense, however, is the way the whole affair was handled by the boys in Brackley. Aguri Suzuki publically questioned the continuous involvement of Nick Fry into the commercial matters of Super Aguri. While it is not known just how Super Aguri was connected to Honda Racing F1, the quotes from Aguri suggest that the Super Aguri team was directly linked to the parent Honda company and not to Brackley. It therefore seemed very odd that Fry would negatively comment on just about any piece of news about possible investors from India (Spice Group) or Germany (now known to be Weigl) that cropped up already during 2007, unless it was his favourite choice of Magma Group headed by Martin Leach. Fry seemed to push hard for that deal to the absolute exclusion of all others. His comment about finding the solution in the last 48 hours was therefore very disingenuous, seeing that the German connection was rumoured for about as long as the Magma deal.
It all made it seem that Fry wanted for Super Aguri to fail, unless he can make a deal for a good acquaintance of his out of it. And with the Honda Racing F1 performance of 2007, who can blame him? Super Aguri narrowly missed on beating the main Honda team, it was merely the Super Aguri cash flow problems and Button's excellent driving that pushed the Brackley boys and girls above the Leafield ones. The Honda Racing slump in performance coincided with the loss of some top talent (Toet, Willis), both leaving during (some say because of) the Fry leadership. During this time, the Honda team also failed to attract any significant sponsorship, resulting in the rather misguided or perhaps even cynical Earth dream marketing campaign. Ross Brawn is finally putting a good team back together and getting him on board just might be enough to keep Fry employed, even if his role has been changed by Brawn's arrival. However, looking from afar, Fry's contributions don't look too stellar. If, as was agreed, Super Aguri was to receive the new Honda chassis later in this season, who knows how good a job they could do with it? Much like in 2007, they could certainly be a threat to the main team.
What does the loss of Super Aguri mean for the future of F1? In the current F1 climate and economy in general, it is doubtful as to what the long term prospects of Toro Rosso may be. Only teams that have grown together with F1 can now expect to build a reasonably competitive chassis. Toro Rosso in its previous Minardi guise had that capability, but it was dropped in the last few years and it might be very hard to put back together. If the current economic trouble continues, a
manufacturer or two might pull the plug and sponsorship for the independents might dry up as well. This would likely lead to teams having to field more than two cars, if the new Concorde agreement will be in any way similar to the previous one. It wouldn't really destroy F1, but it would make it quite a bit more bland and soulless.
For now, though, I want to give big thanks to the Super Aguri team for all the great memories! The little team gave more to the spirit of F1 in its short participation than some other manufacturers manage over many years and infinitely more money spent. You will be missed.
Harry Nuttall - UK
It’s the natural order of things as they have been in F1 since the 1950’s. F1 is the most competitive resource acquisition and deployment challenge on the planet. Dreams are one thing; reality quite another.
Nigel Kirkpatrick
Sorry but I don’t have much sympathy for once, unlike Minardi, Jordan, Tyrrell etc who built their teams from nothing and slogged for years super aguri got it easy. They were handed a manufacturer chassis for free, good drivers for free, top engines for free and had a link with a top manufacturer to help credibility. They also had financial support in tough times. You can’t even begin to compare that to what Jordan or Minardi went through.
As much as I think the sport needs small teams, they need small independent teams, not puppet teams which sadly is all Super Aguri (and Torro Rosso) are.
Gilbert Pednault - Montreal, Canada
It's unfortunate that the Super Aguri team is no more. However, Formula One is the pinnacle of motor racing, and as such, it takes the financial means to not only make the grid but to progress in competitiveness as well. Super Aguri just couldn't do it. Passion for motor racing is not enough, one has to have the sales and marketing capabilities to generate the kind of budget required to compete in any given category, from karting to F1 and everything in between. It's simply a question of being realistic. David Richards made a realistic decision despite his own passion for F1. By contrast, Aguri Suzuki and the Weigl Group's principal are not showing such realism when they blame Nick Fry for the demise of the team. Fry is only a Honda employee and is therefore simply carrying out the wishes of his employer. It would be great to have 12 teams on the grid but not if some of them are only making up the numbers. It's just not what F1 is all about. Finally, I hope that both Anthony Davidson and Takuma Sato will get other drives. I could see Davidson as a third driver for an established team, at least for now.
Jon Yard - UK
After watching the A1GP at Brands I came to the conclusion that there is more to life than F1. F1 may be the pinnacle of motorsport but if that "pinnacle" is condensed to 3-4 teams fielding teams (eg: Ferrari / BMW / Renault / Mercedes) even with 3 cars per team it would not be much of a spectacle since each team would have more need to give orders regarding the finish line-up to secure the best points tally for the drivers champion.
In the wake of scandal after scandal F1 is bleeding it's lifeblood like a car crash victim with no hope of the ambulance arriving before it finally expires. The problem is that it was the flamboyant and often outspoken smaller teams that kept F1 FUN. They were truly the spirit of F1 because they were there to race more than they were there to represent a brand. You may not have liked Eddie Jordan or Paul Stoddart but many dislike the existing team principles and CEO's and many dislike Max Mosely too.
What is wrong with F1 is that it is loosing it's identity as sports like A1GP are rapidly establishing theirs. A1GP pits country against country. These teams aren't voted for by the people of each country so the idea that Team GB actually stands for Britiain is artistic license but it is used with great effect. At the recent finale at Brands every member of our family "picked a team by picking a country". How do you pick a team in F1? I don't drive a Ferrari and I don't drink Red Bull. I don't like Mercedes cars and though I have a Renault Scenic I'm not loyal to that brand. Historically I've picked my F1 team by the personality of the drivers and the team and often found myself routing for the underdogs. Underdogs like Aguri San and his tiny team of dedicated and hard-working individuals.
I think that Honda and especially Nick Fry has forgotten what is important for F1 to survive. Turning on Super Aguri by rejecting an offer that would have allowed them to continue competing will result in people thinking even worse of Honda than they did before. Honda has succeeded in working their way up the grid but isn't that partly because they've killed their competition off of it? Did they learn nothing from the Ferrari / Mclaren debacle of last year?
Deryck Scott - Selkirk, Scotland
Very very sad that we have lost Super Aguri , i was an Arrows fan and was gutted the way of their demise and so with Super Aguri , the buck stops with Ecclestone and Mosely and of course Honda, they hold the cards and they are responsible for all this. F1 will unlike GP2 just turn into a joke, i am sure we are all bored watching Ferrari 1-2 s, i think a major rethink is needed to bring a level playing field for all teams as in Touring Cars etc, This would be fairer and lead to closer racing whitch in my mind is what it is all about.
Paul Clifford
Honda entered into a business partnership with Aguri Suzuki and it didn't work out for lots of reasons. Such is business. While Nick Fry's comments have been worthless and pointless you can't blame him for the situation. The problem lies with Max Mosley and his much talked about money saving regulations eg. V8's not V10's = Millions in R+D, engines to last 2 weekends = millions in R+D, less mechanical grip = Millions in wind tunnels and R+D. All of which added nothing to the event. Sponsors are not put off because F1 is not environmentally friendly they are put off because millions of dollars are being waisted on nothing.
Will Merrett - Nova Scotia, Canada
A sad day for F1 to lose another team from the grid. Super Aguri were a small team but they seemed to have a passion that is maybe lacking in the larger, well moneyed teams. I can understand Honda starting the team as a vehicle for Takuma Sato who is a hero to the Japanese fans and was progressing as a driver from his wild unpredictable early days. But, as the editor mentioned, maybe the fans will now be more annoyed with Honda for not agreeing to bankroll the team after they lost financial backing elsewhere.
I am disappointed by the ever decreasing amount of teams and cars on the grid, when it was promised that we would be seeing twelve teams and 24 cars on the grid in 2008, and now we are down to 20. I look back at video of the races from the 70' and 80's and see 24 or 26 cars starting each race and feel that we, the 2008 fans, are getting ripped off by the lack of excitement we see on the track each race.
So now we loose one more team due to the enormous financial burden of being a Formula One Team, and the ever increasing black hole that sucks up their cash.
As an F1 fan in 2008, and as a proponent of a greener healthier planet and all the ways we need to work together to reduce greenhouse gasses, I find it harder and harder to watch each season. All that seems to be happening is the cars and technology get more and more expensive and they seem to not be doing anything truly worthwhile for the earth.
Yes, it can be said that this technology does trickle down to road car safety, and for that, I'm happy. And how soon will there be left only the major auto manufacturers on the grid (damn close now I'd say). And the second this sport stops adding to their bottom lines in car sales will be the second they bolt for the door.
Gergei Farkas - Stockholm
There is something really wrong with current F1. Huge amounts of money is being spent, without any of the teams making any. Investors should be tripping over eachother, but instead a team like Super Aguri couldn't survive. On top of it all, the entertainment value has reached all time low. I have followed the sport for well over 20 years (saw my first race live in Budapest 1986) but currently I'm accually taping the races just to be able to fast-forward between the tyre-stop-windows. Truly sad.
Gareth Jones - www.garethjones.tv
Super Aguri should take what they have learned from F1 and go elsewhere, there are other categories where the racing is good. Perhaps they should contact Tony Texeira at A1 Grand Prix with regard to obtaining the A1GP Team Japan franchise, (which I believe it is available at the moment). The series is growing rapidly and for the new season which starts in September the cars and engines will be designed and built by Ferrari, who better to get the maximum performance from F1 technology than an ex F1 team, used to working on a tight budget?
With the new cars coming on board the series offers a level playing field for newcomers, in their first season.
There is no doubt that Takuma could well win races, and perhaps even bring the "World Cup Of Motorsport" to Japan.
Tom Firth
i have watch motorsport for the last 11 years of my life thats most of it then and so have seen super aguri lauch and fall and are very sad for that such a small but fighting team lost out but f1 in money terms is getting so expensive and the concorde agreement will only make it harder for new teams to establish i hope that f1 will continue to allow new teams and hopfully competitive ones in the future.
Rich Young
for many years now F1 racing has been an industry, and not really a sport. It was taken over by marketing hacks, and auto industry giants in an effort to have more control over the political process to win car sales.
The current state of the little guy being left behind is no different that the many independent car companies that went out of business here in the good old U.S. of A. Unfortunately, when one looks a little bit outside of racing, you find that it is exactly that way in any industry which becomes successful. And, the political process makes it a bit worse.
There are just a few independents left in F1, and not by their choice. These owners realize that their days are numbered unless the FIA comes up with a realistic way to reduce costs, pay them for their efforts, and level the field a bit so that they have a better change at winnig races along with marketing dollars.
Tony Knorr - Haddonfield, NJ, USA
The FIA and FOM have done nothing to keep costs in check. Bernie always has his hand out for more money. Because of Bernie's demands, promoters cannot even break even. It takes the local government to subsidize races. Why is the Concorde Agreement so secret? Could it be because Bernie gets the largest slice of the pie? I was glad when Mosley replaced Jean Marie Balestre, now I can't wait for Max to resign. Mosley has created rules instability in the name of Safety & Cost Cutting.
The manufacturers are not blameless either. Perhaps it was better for Honda to let Super Aguri fold so it could write-off the financial losses. Why else would Nick Frye be adamant that Super Aguri would not race? At least give the team a chance to work out a deal. What is going to happen when one (or more) decides to call it quits? Who will take up the slack? There will be no independent team left to continue.
What would save the teams money? Try a long term & stable set of rules. Getting rid of Carbon brakes would save money, increase braking distances, improve the chance of overtaking & perhaps improve the show. More passing means more excitement. More excitement means more viewers. More viewers mean more sponsor interest. More sponsors mean more money for the teams. Do away with qualifying with the race amount of fuel on board. Allow adjusting fuel levels before the race. Allow the fastest driver to qualify on Pole.
I will miss the Super Aguri team as I have cheered them on since their start in F1. I've been following F1 since the late 70's and have seen many teams come and go, but it was the technology & these small teams that kept me interested. I have always cheered the underdog and since there are none left in Formula One, I see few reasons to watch the races. The loss of the Arrows team in 2002 nearly did it. The loss of Super Aguri is enough. The Turkish GP may well be my last.
Not following F1 could allow interest in other series here in the US. The IRL may improve now that some drivers and teams from Champ Car have joined. ALMS keeps my interest, but there are too few races in the season and not enough competition in P1 & GT1. Grand Am is a there, but it's not a must see. NASCAR is NASCRAP.
I guess I could start cheering for Williams…
Mat Cochinos
Formula One has suffered a blow greater than Spygate and the Mosley scandal combined. The announcement that Super Aguri will not compete in Turkey, nor the rest of the season, came as no surprise though was sobering none the less. Aguri Suzuki's team was founded on the principle of a customer car team, and were caught out when the rules changed. With sponsors not paying and debts mounting it was the only way the saga was ever going to end.
The about face over customer cars has created a situation in which teams, created and structured using customer cars as their fundamental basis for existence, now find themselves in a situation where they will be unable to compete. As a result the Prodrive entry never materialized, Super Aguri has been forced to close and there are eyebrows being raised over the Toro Rosso.
Red Bull currently bank rolls two teams, with the customer car changes this no longer makes sense. A new investor needs to be found, and as we've seen this week they can take years to find, and only hours to lose. Should Red Bull withdraw support from the team, Toro Rosso, most likely, will go down the same well worn path as Super Aguri. When one considers the potential ramifications the full picture becomes clear; we now face a grid of just 20 cars, the minimum required and contractually obliged by FOM to present at any given event. This is four down on what was promised at the start of the year, with Prodrive too failing to make the grid.
Formula One has a long history of teams failing, even the likes of Lotus were not immune. During the last two decades we have moved from having so many cars some were forced to pre qualify to the situation we have now where we cannot field enough cars to fill the grid. The sport has found itself in this predicament before, however what we now face has a darker side.
Should we lose another we reach a particularly worrying fact; some teams will be expected to field 3 cars, logically coming from those better off; Ferrari, McLaren etc. While the cost of running additional cars is not as great as financing a completely new team, it wold be a drain on resources and man power. Few teams, if any, would be able to cope with the additional workload without significant initial investment purely to have the staff and catalogue of spares available to support the third car.
The sporting implications are immense and confusing. Some teams have 3 cars, others 2. Some cars can score points, others can't, while all drivers can score points and steal points from other teams by occupying points paying positions. The constructors championship would be dominated by the front running teams, and since they are the ones likely to supply the third car, it's possible the top 6 positions would be held by just two teams. This leaves just 2 points paying positions for the other 8 teams, 16 cars and drivers, squabbling over 3 points and the respective TV and travel bonuses associated with them.
Using the current F1 climate as an example it's quite possible that no team other than Ferrari, McLaren, BMW and possibly Renault would score a point. The others would not therefore qualify for the bonuses handed out to teams, and since they would not be scoring points or figuring well in the results, sponsors would be even more difficult to attract. No prize money, less sponsorship dollars and a widening void between those at the front and the back. There would be no escape unless the entire financial structure of the sport was to change in such a manner as to protect those involved as apposed to reward those at the front.
We sit upon the brink of disaster. The sport would lose significant credibility if the grid was forced to be made up by teams having to run additional cars. Should just one more team fail, and there is a long history of teams doing this, we will be faced with a grid as confused as any you will ever see. It is cause for alarm, not just concern. One can only hope the sport sees sense and does what is required to protect those competing, and to encourage new entires to again swell the grids.
Greg Cunneen - Tokyo
I think the loophole that was the "customer car" is mostly to blame. Other factors played a part, but allowing customer cars in, on dubious grounds, and then having them banned has hurt SA most, Toro Rosso as well, and put paid to Prodrive before they even started. Who is to blame for the loophole, I am not sure. Lawyers? But there is my 2 cents worth.
Tony Martin
The reason that the Super Aguri game plan became untenable, and that is forcing the sale of Torro Rosso is the "no customer car" rule.
That rule has cost F1 an existing team, the non arrival of a proposed team, and probably the departure of another team in the future.
The proposal to allow customer team entry provided a means for the expansion and development of the Formula and an opportunity for existing constructors to defray development costs over a wider base. Surely a sensible way forward for the Formula which, with a little goodwill, could have encouraged further investment.
Two teams lacked the confidence and foresight to adopt the proposed changes. Spyker was struggling and their attitude can be understood. The team has since been sold and there does not seem to be the same vocal opposition from Force India.
The other team, Williams threatened to take their opposition outside the sport into the court system, and it was this threat that would seem to have effectively killed off customer cars. From outside the team it is probably difficult to understand the pressures that Sir Frank and Patrick were under at the time, but it has always intrigued me that Williams did not see this as an opportunity to grow the organisation by supplying customer chassis. But they did not, and for whatever reason they adopted a policy that has caused the present problems in Formula One and probably ensured, that for the forseeable future, only major manufacturers will be in a position to own and develop teams.
The ultimate irony will come when Williams either fails, or is purchased by a major Manufacturer.
Deryck Scott - Scotland
Having read all the feedback form other fans of Super Aguri and all F1 fans in general i think the best thing that could happen now is Torro Rosso to go bust or withdraw from F1 as well. The shit would truly hit the fan for Bernie and Max Mosely. Can you picture the scene the British GP or even earlier Ferrari and BMW asked by Bernie and Max to field another car each just to make up the Grid to the 20 cars required. Now if they had the guts to tell Bernie and Max where to shove their request can you imagine what the hell would happen. A worrying thought but it just might be the start of getting this whole circus sorted out, send in the clowns, i don't think so, more of a move over Mr Eclstone and Mosley your time is up, wake up and smell the coffee and stop lining your own pockets at the expense of all those teams who have bitten the dust. This is the real world give us hard working F1 fans the show we deserve, with a full grid and as many teams on it just like the old days. (Hard working F1 fans? - Ed)
David Allen Hutson
Aguri Suzuki is a class act as a man and it's F1s loss they are gone. I'm afraid with the state of the world's economy and explosive political unrest his team and STR will be the start, not the end, of a run of teams in the excessively expensive and increasing irrelevant sport. Any bets on who might go away next? Honda? Toyota? Williams (god forbid)?
Watch the summer Olympics, they will be an indicator as to the wellness of the East.
Edward Bowers - USA
It appears that Honda had planned for ages to dump them. There was no reason fro Fry to issue a statement 24 hours ahead of the Honda meeting in Tokyo, to bar Aguri from the paddock.
Wigel was in place to help bail out the team.
This looks to be the demise of the independent team, and the start of the decline of F1. Sport is not for the rich!!
Norm McDougall - Canada
Formula One is VERY expensive! That's all the explanation needed
Nancy Ott
What a sad day. Super Aguri's achievements in 2007 showed what can still be done in F1 with a limited budget. (Especially compared to the 2007 record of a certain other team whose name shall not be mentioned.) They certainly had some good races in the first half of the season. Takuma Sato's masterful pass of Fernando Alonso in the 2007 Canadian GP was a delight to watch (and deprived Alonso of a point that would have come in mighty handy at the end of the season); Ant Davidson would have been up there with him, except for his close encounter with a groundhog!
I've often wondered why Super Aguri's image as a scrappy underdog didn't attract more sponsorship. However, with the end of customer cars, it seems that the tide was turning against them. Even with Honda's support, who knows how much longer they would have lasted? But I do think that Honda pulled the plug on Super Aguri too quickly. Given more time, they might have been able to put together enough funding to finish the 2008 season.
Martin Feldwick - UK
Many in the West would see little point in this brave but cobbled up team existing, but in Japan Sato is a God, appearing in the same ads as David Beckham and other greats. The sole point of Super Aguri was to keep Sato and Honda together while allowing, at least in theory, better drivers to join the real Honda team.
Japan loved Super Aguri, evident in the huge amount of publicity generated in the F1 sports press by combining local heroes Aguri Suzuki, Sato and Honda. What seems illogical to us, is perfectly logical to the Japanese, for whom competing in the race is just as important as winning it, which is just as well as they have long realized they rarely win anything. That they have pulled the plug on Super Aguri shows that even anadmans dream has its limits. Trouble was Suzuki ended up believing it was for real.
As to the new rule changes, probably reality has stepped in. No underfunded team is going to thrive running last years failure, for no major team is going to sell them a winner. F1 is more like Horse racing than any other sport. As far as i know, at least legally, no-one has ever taken last years winner, repainted it, called it a different name,denied it adequate funds for food or training, stuck a pay as you go jockey on it and won the National next time round. No recycled Mclaren is going to be anything other than a grid filler. F1 takes no prisoners. Many wannabee's are way out their depth, however much they think they are on top, and have been successful in other series or business's.
Peter van Kampen Snr - New Zealand
The legal action threatened by Sir Frank William's (has he forgotten he was a small privateer!) and Patrick Head has meant that Customer cars now won't happen, the premise that Red Bull owner and Honda had with SuperAguri running two teams has unraveled and the business model which one could justify no longer is the case, this is a great shame, by all means let the big teams run more than 2 cars, but all that will mean is the hard to come by sponsorship dollar will rest with a few chosen ones.
John Washbush - Heltonville, Indiana
It is not about Customer Cars. It is not about chassis, transmission, engine, aerodynamics or suspension components. It is not about qualifying, points or product development. It seems to me that anyone looking to find an explanation for Super Aguir's demise in any event since the demise of Minardi, is missing the point. The events leading up to Aguri san's exit began the day that someone decided that competition between auto makers was going to be the heart of the sport. Someone decided that the fans will stand behind their favorite national auto maker and that will keep interest, and attendance, and ticket sales, and collateral sales, and TV revenue, and shared incomes nice and high. Somebody decided that F-1 racing, before anything else, was a profit making enterprise ... and, a HUGE profit at that. Someone decided that the auto makers had the deepest pockets around and were most deeply rooted in the payoff of success, and so began the the slide from a sport of competition to competition for the almighty Euro. Someone decided that big money was what it was all about and big money
would keep F-1 going. Somebody really missed the boat.
So, for all practical purposes, F-1 racing is now down to 10 teams. Not to worry. Maybe VW will field a team. Or Peugeot Citroen. Or Mazda. Actually, maybe the Communist Party Central Committee in China would like to sponsor a team under the name of a Chinese auto maker. Maybe ... wait ... is there an automaker in Dubai? What is holding back all of the other automakers? Simply stated, they don't see the direct payoff of expenditures for F-1 racing and increases in the bottom line.
If they did, they would be there. Evidently Honda, Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault, BMW and Toyota think that there is some pay off to them for the absolutely outlandish financial outlay that they make for the sake of ... what? The sport? I doubt it. Rest assured, it's the bottom line.
If there is one current event that impacted directly on Super Aguri's tenure it would have to be the insistence on the part of Honda that they can no longer wait to get their money back. A three year payoff? No dice. They insisted that they want it all now, even though I am sure that the handwriting was on the wall as to the impact of that decision. The repayment can't come right now ... unless a new buyer comes along almost over night. Please don't read this as an indictment of Honda ... I happen to admire Honda the company. I am Honda John, for pete's sake. Actually, it just came to me that maybe it is an Old Honda The Company that I like so much, particularly the one in which S. Honda gave himself the title of Supreme Adviser to his own company. Those were the days when Honda went racing because Mr. Honda believed that going racing meant a love for the sport.
When I think that, from the highest levels of accountability for the leadership of the sport of F-1 Racing to the levels of turning nuts and bolts, the "big" stories of the last few years are theft, betrayal, indiscretion, dishonesty, plagiarism, court cases, investigations of improprieties, rule infractions, bribery, insults, indifference and gross negligence, I can't help but think that more than the Times -They are a Changing. The essence of F-1 racing is changing. With the exception of this or that individual driver, or this or that individual team member, I really don't see racing for the love and the passion of racing. Who is the Roger Penske of Formula One? I see people racing as means to make a personal fortune, or to gather gobs of attention, or both, or meet financial objectives, or sales objectives or performance objectives, but I don't see too many individuals racing with the spirit of Fangio, or Jimmy Clark or even Senna, for that matter. Ok, let's don't quibble over what motivates Mr. Hamilton or Mr. Kubica. We are talking about Super Aguri here.
What exactly is wrong with the racing, you ask? It is boring. Plain and simple, it is roundy round, albeit at great speed, but without excitement. It lacks lead changes, it lacks passing, races are won and lost by someone's mistake in the pits, by cars that play follow the leader for two hours at a time. Constant rule changes stifle development, not encourage it. One day traction control is OK, the next day it isn't. Everyone uses the same engine management control box. There is one supplier of tires that area designed to limit the performance of the car. How long do you think that aero packages designed by Salvidor Dali will be permitted? Turbo charging went away. V-10's went away. Not that there is anything wrong with a V-8, but the cars are turning to vanilla. If a person wants to watch races with all the cars being the same, there are plenty of opportunities. But, Formula One has always been a go-for-broke, risk it all and win for the sake of being more clever and more talented and for the sake of winning. I well understand the principal of "Race on Sunday (or Saturday) and sell on Monday". But, I am not sure that this makes for better racing.
So, what's my point? The point is that Arrows, Minardi and now Super Aguri were doomed before they started. They thought that all they needed to go racing was will and determination to compete and to win, and, if they had that, others who love racing as much as they do would help them make it happen. Aguri Suzuki thought that he had found that in Honda. What Super Aguri learned is that the race team has become the pawn in a game that someone else is playing. It is no longer a challenge to make a car to the best of your ability and see if you are better than someone else who made his car to the best of his ability. Now it is all about the money. ROI never did stand for Racing Obsession Inspires. It always stood for Return On Investment. Aguri san, you should have known that.
Ken Rutherford
I'm an Australian who worked for Benetton and Footwork From '90-'95 in equal time, as a hydraulic design engineer (active susp, dampers, and susp. design). I remember Aguri as a gentleman, and a wealthy one. He entered F1 on the back of being Japaneze and Hondas' support (Footwork used Mugen engines for a period, Honda works engines detuned). He was never going to 'compete', just participate. Sure the grid needs to be filled, some are dreamers of greater things..(perhaps Stoddart), some bask in the scene.. enough said. I just feel for the grunt in the background, the people on the floor, who now need to find work elsewhere...Aguri is still wealthy..
Brian Griffiths - Burlington, Canada
Let's be realistic about finance and F1 in this decade.
This is probably the most expensive sport to be involved in and without major sponsors, automotive manufacturer's and/or billionaire owners, you just can't play. Everybody loves teams like Super Aguri because they are the 'David's' compared to the Goliath's (Ferrari, Mclaren, BMW etc.) but the cold hard reality is there is no longer any room for the little guys in F1 which is a sad day indeed.
Chris Porozny - Canada
It is sad to lose a team, especially one like Super Aguri, a team with true joie-de-vivre. Sure, Suzuki is a dreamer (like my other favourite small team owners, Stoddart and Minardi) but these men have always been the soul of the sport. I mean, as much as I admire Ron Dennis, McLaren doesn't strike me as a passionate place to work. And Ferrari; this is a team which won the world championship by default and then behaved as if they earned it – definitely no soul there.
Still, there will be other men of the same grain as Mateschitz, Stoddart and Mallya who step up and save the sport from the money managers and marketing departments; it is just a matter of time.
Hell, I'd do it in a second if I had half the fortune of any of these men. Win or lose, racing is racing.
ps. And I can't wait until we see the end of all the idiotic winglets which make the cars look like origami mistakes.
Steve Belluomini - Canada
With the announcement of Aguri san's unfortunate demise, Formula 1 and the people that run it (Mr.'s Mosley and Eccelstone) have been bitten by the proverbial hand that feeds them. Mr. Mosley's attempt to reduce costs in F1 have done in fact the complete opposite, All the changes to engines, aerodynamics, tires, etc , year after successive year have only made the teams dole out more money, and in turn stretched their budgets to the max. Of course SS United thought twice about sending another check in the mail to S/A, with the constant tinkering that is going on with equipment how can anyone possibly keep costs in check. I agree that engines should last longer that one lap or one race and that I am sure has added some cost relief, but when changes are made each and every year how can money not be going out faster than it comes in. I cringe the day that Sir Frank decides enough is enough and pulls out, and that would be the end of a truly great team. F1 was great in the 80's and early 90's when these two insufferable children were not dabbling as much in the sandbox that is F1. Sure we had teams come and go, but most of these teams were hanging on a by a thread and were severely underfunded. What F1 needs to do is look back in order to figure out a way to go forward. Customer cars are not the answer... throughout the history of F1 most teams have built their own chassis, fine some had alternate engine suppliers, but the chassis played a very important part in the whole scheme of things…we need to get back those times... we need to bring back multiple tire manufacturers..., we want to see 28 cars on the grid... fine maybe some things of the past weren't great but that is kept the mystery and allure of F1 so unique...
David Turnedge - Australia
Super Aguri was on the grid for the purest of racing reasons: ex-F1 racer wants to go racing and preserve his countryman's presence on the grid.
Using the leverage of a local manufacturer to support a local drive in getting started wasn't crazy: it was daring, radical, inspired. It spoke of everything that helped Jordan build a car on the cheap and enter F1 on the smell of an oily rag.
This is the sort of stuff we need in F1.
We do not the likes of Toyota spending - each year - (10 times?) the cost of buying a back-marking team (including the real estate and TV rights position) without the success we want to see from all teams throughput the season.
It's dumb economics.
Lack of customer cars on the grid guarantees that F1 will remain where it is now. A beautiful, exciting, insular and elitist sport.
I am sad Super Aguri wil not be racing this weekend. And I don't blame Honda - the blame rests squarely at the feet of the FIA and the lobbyists who make the rules of the game.
Andrew Anderson - Sydney, Australia
Having been an avid supporter of Sir Frank Williams from the 70's on, I was very disappointed to see him kill the small team future in F1 last year by forcing the dis-allowance of "customer cars" which makes him the greatest hypocrite in Formula 1 history after he used Brabham, de Tomaso, and March cars to go F1 racing before he built his first car.
With Torro Rosso on the brink of extinction, it seems F1 is closely following the demise of CART, as with a global recession on the cards, thanks to the greed of the oil producers, who's going to plough scores of millions into an increasingly unpopular sport ?.
I just loved the 60's and early 70's when a DFV cost from 7500 quid so F1 was affordable to those with a few quid, and pre - qualifying was needed to reduce the 32 odd cars down to the 26 car grid.
Good old Bernie and M. Ballestre changed all that, so now most of us have to pay to watch F1 with commentators who learnt not one iota from the MASTERS - Murray and James.
I think A1 GP will take over from F1 within the next 3 years, particularly with F1 cars probably sounding as loud as a hybrid Toyota Prius in a couple of years and not giving the very close racing with lots of... ( beep out the following ).... PASSING.... that A1 GP provides!!
I'd also like to say goodbye to Bernie and Max and welcome someone who loves F1 and doesn't want to be come another Billionaire, and Jean Todt.
Graham C. Dugas III - Hilton Head, S.C, USA
Max and Bernie tried to shove customer cars down the teams' throats. Rightly so, Spyker and Williams resisted and threatened civil action that would have certainly prevailed. Thus Max and Bernie quietly backed down and Bernie never made good on his promise to change the prize money distribution to offset the impact of customer teams. Had Williams et al not resisted, we would be mourning the loss to the grid of Williams and Jordan/Spyker/Force India. We would have year old McLarens as either Prodrive or Team Dubai or Direxiv crowding out Honda, Toyota, Red Bull and at times BMW from the points, prize money, sponsors and championship standings to the detriment of genuine constructors.
Losing Aguri was far preferable to this, though it was avoidable. Honda's pocketbook was growing weary. Sponsorship is scarce and rules uncertainty looms. The chassis was never truly an "in house" production and thus they didn't have enough fabrication means to grow into a genuine independent team. I look for STR to be tolerated as long as they don't get too many points. It is preferable to the messy "third car" solution. If they threaten Force India's or Williams' prize money, then they too will be forced to truly make a car or leave unless Bernie can come up with a $$$ compromise in a timely fashion.
I do not welcome Max's El-Cheapo vision for F1 or his unenforceable Socialist budget caps. The teams could simply place their gearbox budgets to LMP, their suspension budgets could likewise be hidden in their other racing endeavors etc. There are a million accounting tricks. Besides, it is against nature to limit how much value a manufacturer or other party can place upon the F1 crown.
We need to open the regs so that innovation can return to F1. We need to allow CVTs, active suspension, skirtless ground effects, no minimum weight (crash loads only) so that teams will have to design balanced cars without the crutch of ballast, no engine freeze, allow any V-angle or number of cylinders, allow electro magneto servo valves (like Renault was developing), etc. By placing a higher value on innovation, the teams could spend money more wisely than on the diminishing returns of infinite refinement chasing gains of 0.00001%.
Roland Eckert - Wokingham
It’s a real pity that such a resilient and hard-working team has had to fold. I blame the rule-makers completely.
To change the rules knowing the repercussions is just foolish. Another bad decision on Mr Moseley’s behalf.
Lets hope his successor will make better decisions, decisions which help the sport.
Rudi Enos
Constructors should be allowed to enter a third car, but only through a private entrant who must have their own pit, transporters and garage, ie effectively a private team
this allows privateers to enter while generating usefull income and publicity for the factory
all manufacturers would benifit, so why not make it mandatory for 30 cars to enter?
first practice would reduce this to 15 as now
it seems simple, doesent it?
Harry Stiller
Personally I think that F1 is on the road to self-destruction. Never before was so much controlled by so few who now call all the shots and make all the decisions concerning the rules, who gets what and finally.... who can compete in the show. Having been basically administered by just two people who have been each in their own right 'Masters of the game', it has been allowed to become a monopoly. The main issue is, has it been to the betterment of the sport? Perhaps a rhetorical question when one considers the present state of play.
Let's examine the current basics. Two teams with budgets that make everyone else's look ridiculous. Just one tyre company. Just one man making the F1 rules. Just one man running the show. A front running group of 6 or 7, a middle running group of 8-9, a few stragglers there for the crumbs in case everybody else falls off! Hardly a recipe for good racing and an exciting spectacle. It's no longer a sport by any stretch of the imagination; it's simply a highly developed business concept which has been ruled for the past two decades by the afore-mentioned two individuals for profit and gain and personal satisfaction.
Unfortunately, we will probably never see again the days of a 28-30 car grid, wheel to wheel stuff throughout the field and it being a lottery as to who might win out of 75-80% of the drivers taking part. Oh how I yearn for the days when it was go out and win and there was no result decided on who might make the fastest pit stop in order to overtake their rivals!
For years now we have endured processions with one team or another being the dominent factor. There has been a distinct lack of real racing throughout the order with the result that F1 became boring to the real enthusiast. I won't linger on the politics of it all, we all know about that aspect as there's been enough to choke a cart horse the past year or two. Add to the mix good circuit venues being axed or threatened and losing their slot. Venues such as Indy not being able to make commercial sense of holding an event; nobody without government or State backing being able to even afford one and, some of the latest venues which have been built already thinking of pulling out because they lose too much money. Altogether, a very sorry state of affairs!
Alan Bushell - Victoria, BC, Canada
I still can't see what the problem is with allowing customer cars. We all know and love GP racing here, so I won't go on about the great drivers who first appeared in a privately-run examples of somebody else's design. Boy, as a Canadian fan, I sure wish Jacques Villeneuve had been driving a year-old McLaren a few years ago, instead of that BAR creation! So, I wish Super Aguri was still around running old Hondas.... and trying to qualify in a 30 car grid! Too bad F1 believes it's own hype, and insists on these Agreements which limit participation and determine who gets how much money. Once upon a time,a Team didn't simply represent a vote at a meeting; real racers were out there EARNING their share of the money! ... And imagine F1 turning Dave Richards away, when teams are folding or putting up For Sale signs. There could be troubled times ahead.....