Audi to join F1 in 2016
Discussion
ellroy said:
How many statements from Audi over the years saying F1 adds nothing to the tech of current road cars unlike the WEC?
And it strikes me that many of the major manufacturers are starting to agree, LMP1 next year is looking like a corker. Audi, Porsche, Toyota, Nissan and I'll include Lotus, because I like a giggle. Also, the ongoing speculation around Ford making a full return.
Audi to F1? Its not happening and it smells like 100% BE bulls
t to distract from the perilous state of the back of the F1 grid.
Unless you wish to bow out and gently move away from diesel technology and champion hybrid/petrol technology..And it strikes me that many of the major manufacturers are starting to agree, LMP1 next year is looking like a corker. Audi, Porsche, Toyota, Nissan and I'll include Lotus, because I like a giggle. Also, the ongoing speculation around Ford making a full return.
Audi to F1? Its not happening and it smells like 100% BE bulls
t to distract from the perilous state of the back of the F1 grid.Edited by ellroy on Monday 27th October 16:25
If nothing else, F1 this year has brought hybrid tech bang into the spotlight. Audi isn't missing that. Historically they have played the waiting game, looked at what others did and then marketed it better.
Audi already run a hybrid in LMP, they championed highly efficient petrol technology already in LMP, TSFI anyone?
It's the same old dross put out by lazy journalists, already rejected by Audi, that's been heard a thousand times before.
There's more chance of Ferrari entering WEC than of Audi going the other way.
It's the same old dross put out by lazy journalists, already rejected by Audi, that's been heard a thousand times before.
There's more chance of Ferrari entering WEC than of Audi going the other way.
ellroy said:
Audi already run a hybrid in LMP, they championed highly efficient petrol technology already in LMP, TSFI anyone?
It's the same old dross put out by lazy journalists, already rejected by Audi, that's been heard a thousand times before.
There's more chance of Ferrari entering WEC than of Audi going the other way.
You have your opinion and I have it from the horses mouth. Im just a lowly 'car sales guy It's the same old dross put out by lazy journalists, already rejected by Audi, that's been heard a thousand times before.
There's more chance of Ferrari entering WEC than of Audi going the other way.
' what do i know.Just like my Ebola thread. Before the s
t hit the fan. And did you see my pics of VW hybrid? Another lost thread. Before it was even seen in the UK? Ah well.....
Edited by TVR1 on Wednesday 29th October 22:37
PW said:
TVR1 said:
Historically they have played the waiting game, looked at what others did and then marketed it better.
Quattro, TFSI, TDI, E-Tron... yeah - always playing the waiting game.They came up with snazzy names/acronyms though.
Ah, we've come at from different angles.
From my perspective, it was a case of the tech being in road cars first (where they weren't the innovator), then when regulations have allowed (often driven by wider political interest) Audi have jumped in and used them as marketing platforms for cars that already had the tech.
From my perspective, it was a case of the tech being in road cars first (where they weren't the innovator), then when regulations have allowed (often driven by wider political interest) Audi have jumped in and used them as marketing platforms for cars that already had the tech.
Sway said:
Ah, we've come at from different angles.
From my perspective, it was a case of the tech being in road cars first (where they weren't the innovator), then when regulations have allowed (often driven by wider political interest) Audi have jumped in and used them as marketing platforms for cars that already had the tech.
And there is nothing wrong with that. Audi are a business, and, at the moment, they are doing some bloody good business. Audi do not need F1 at this moment in time because it is a joke, give it a few years and it might become a viable option. From my perspective, it was a case of the tech being in road cars first (where they weren't the innovator), then when regulations have allowed (often driven by wider political interest) Audi have jumped in and used them as marketing platforms for cars that already had the tech.
For most manufactures, F1 is an advert. "Look at us, we are winning F1" is used to help sell road cars. Audi, do not need this. VAG have pretty much every motor sport covered for less than the cost of 1 F1 team. Why spend £300 million on an advert when a £100 million is doing just fine. It doesn't make sense for Audi to join F1.
mullerrice18 said:
Why spend £300 million on an advert when a £100 million is doing just fine. It doesn't make sense for Audi to join F1.
Except that people who don't really watch motorsports are hearing, every few weeks, '...Mercedes win...', would you rather spend £300 million for people to hear that time and again, or £100 million for them to hear '...Audi have won Le Mans...' once?I wouldn't be surprised if BMW head back in the next couple of years.
maffski said:
Except that people who don't really watch motorsports are hearing, every few weeks, '...Mercedes win...'.
Audi marketing and PR doesn't really work like that though does it. It even when they aren't dominating WEC, they can still market the road car and race technology and branding. F1 doesn't allow them to market E-tron, Ultra, Laserlight etc. maffski said:
mullerrice18 said:
Why spend £300 million on an advert when a £100 million is doing just fine. It doesn't make sense for Audi to join F1.
Except that people who don't really watch motorsports are hearing, every few weeks, '...Mercedes win...', would you rather spend £300 million for people to hear that time and again, or £100 million for them to hear '...Audi have won Le Mans...' once?I wouldn't be surprised if BMW head back in the next couple of years.
mullerrice18 said:
maffski said:
mullerrice18 said:
Why spend £300 million on an advert when a £100 million is doing just fine. It doesn't make sense for Audi to join F1.
Except that people who don't really watch motorsports are hearing, every few weeks, '...Mercedes win...', would you rather spend £300 million for people to hear that time and again, or £100 million for them to hear '...Audi have won Le Mans...' once?I wouldn't be surprised if BMW head back in the next couple of years.
VladD said:
mullerrice18 said:
maffski said:
mullerrice18 said:
Why spend £300 million on an advert when a £100 million is doing just fine. It doesn't make sense for Audi to join F1.
Except that people who don't really watch motorsports are hearing, every few weeks, '...Mercedes win...', would you rather spend £300 million for people to hear that time and again, or £100 million for them to hear '...Audi have won Le Mans...' once?I wouldn't be surprised if BMW head back in the next couple of years.
Also, with so many brands within the group and being so adaptive, I can see VAG going from strength to strength.
mullerrice18 said:
But Audi do not need F1 as an advert, they are doing just fine with how things are. The new cars that I see on the road are mostly VAG. They have every base covered and I cannot see a massive investment in F1 increasing there sales by £300 million.
Then why bother spending money on WEC? If the publicity of F1 isn't worth £300m then the publicity from WEC can't be worth 100. Shutter that program and make more profit.maffski said:
Then why bother spending money on WEC? If the publicity of F1 isn't worth £300m then the publicity from WEC can't be worth 100. Shutter that program and make more profit.
The 100 million was just a guess at what Audi spend on there whole motorsport program. I think that the money they have spent winning in WEC has definitely had a positive effect on the brand even if it hasn't recovered the costs. But dropping what the do now and picking up F1, is, in my eyes, mad. 5-10 years time, with operating costs closer to 100 million for a team that can win, honda coming back, possibly a korean company entering the sport, stable teams that can afford to race, a larger share of the profits for the teams, F1 would be a very valuable platform for Audi to use.
This is all in a dream world though, and going by the state of F1 today, the future is not looking bright.
a few thoughts
1) audi get far more positive exposure for being successful at le mans, which is more relevant to their road cars than they would in f1
2) audis WEC budget is circa $50 million....f1 would be $200 million....big jump in cost
3) I cant see audi leaving le mans until they beat porsches 16 wins...so id guess we have at least another 4 years with them at le mans!
basically audi get more bang for their buck at le mans than anywhere else....so whats the point/why do they need to race in f1?
1) audi get far more positive exposure for being successful at le mans, which is more relevant to their road cars than they would in f1
2) audis WEC budget is circa $50 million....f1 would be $200 million....big jump in cost
3) I cant see audi leaving le mans until they beat porsches 16 wins...so id guess we have at least another 4 years with them at le mans!
basically audi get more bang for their buck at le mans than anywhere else....so whats the point/why do they need to race in f1?
Why do people not think Audi gets value from WEC / Le Mans? (lets be honest, WEC is irrelevant, LM is the boy).
They've used that platform to develop, prove and sell TFSi, TDi, and now Ultra (which they're making a brand out of). The cars have funky LED lights on the front, that are blindingly bright and used at night to differentiate their cars from the others on the grid. They're reliable. They're fast. They're efficient. They are the choice of winners. All of these things are tempting to both fleet managers and middle management who has the choice of merc / BMW / Lexus / Audi for his next 2l diesel.
Audi's marketing in general is really clever, and their motorsports programme is an extension of that. They put the R8 on the grid against Lambo, Porsche, Ferrari, Aston etc via privateer teams driving factory developed off the shelf cars - they don't need to win, the association with high end brands is exactly what they want. The same R8 is often seen in rap videos / films etc (presumably supported) - the lack of an official Audi entry to e.g Blancpain means that if they don't win then they don't lose (it was a customer car), but every time they are on screen next to Bentley then they win in a PR sense by association.
At Le Mans, you can see the marketing behind the motorsports programme. The LM team is obviously very successful, but the tactics employed reflect the brand values - efficiency, and reliability. These are above all other requirements. 2011 - Peugeot was the faster car. Audi win on efficiency, making less stops. Win for the team, bigger win for the marketeers. 2014 - Toyota is faster. At times, Porsche is faster. Audi wins on reliability.
All of that is tremendous value for Audi - just like their Quattro pushing BTCC programme was - they use the motorsports programme both for product development and most importantly exploit the success they have with the marketing side and branding. In the 80's, rallying spawned Quattro. In the '00's, LM gave us TFSi. Now, LM 2014 sees the launch of Ultra as a brand name - I'd bet my ass it stays around for a long, long time...
They've used that platform to develop, prove and sell TFSi, TDi, and now Ultra (which they're making a brand out of). The cars have funky LED lights on the front, that are blindingly bright and used at night to differentiate their cars from the others on the grid. They're reliable. They're fast. They're efficient. They are the choice of winners. All of these things are tempting to both fleet managers and middle management who has the choice of merc / BMW / Lexus / Audi for his next 2l diesel.
Audi's marketing in general is really clever, and their motorsports programme is an extension of that. They put the R8 on the grid against Lambo, Porsche, Ferrari, Aston etc via privateer teams driving factory developed off the shelf cars - they don't need to win, the association with high end brands is exactly what they want. The same R8 is often seen in rap videos / films etc (presumably supported) - the lack of an official Audi entry to e.g Blancpain means that if they don't win then they don't lose (it was a customer car), but every time they are on screen next to Bentley then they win in a PR sense by association.
At Le Mans, you can see the marketing behind the motorsports programme. The LM team is obviously very successful, but the tactics employed reflect the brand values - efficiency, and reliability. These are above all other requirements. 2011 - Peugeot was the faster car. Audi win on efficiency, making less stops. Win for the team, bigger win for the marketeers. 2014 - Toyota is faster. At times, Porsche is faster. Audi wins on reliability.
All of that is tremendous value for Audi - just like their Quattro pushing BTCC programme was - they use the motorsports programme both for product development and most importantly exploit the success they have with the marketing side and branding. In the 80's, rallying spawned Quattro. In the '00's, LM gave us TFSi. Now, LM 2014 sees the launch of Ultra as a brand name - I'd bet my ass it stays around for a long, long time...
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff