RE: Caterham F1 - WTF?

Author
Discussion

suffolk009

5,344 posts

164 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
There's already 14 pages on this subject elsewhere.

Slightly late with the editorial comment here PH.

fatboy18

18,930 posts

210 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
More corporate corruption in F1! There's a shock. Im sure Bernie will slap some wrists and attempt to sort it out

cookie1600

2,094 posts

160 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
How to have a small fortune in F1 racing?

Start off with a big fortune.

JD PH

2,668 posts

116 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
As a former member of Caterham staff all I'd say is that - above all else - I feel sorry for the staff stuck in the middle of this. It must be like being a child stuck in the middle of a messy divorce.

Also, my former colleagues at Caterham Cars - whilst separate from all this to an extent - still have to deal with the fallout from the Caterham brand being dragged through the mud. A lot of people (including me) have worked very hard over the years to build the Caterham brand and seeing it associated with all this is a real shame. Hopefully people will understand the difference between the various entities... but I fear that the nuances may be lost on the uninitiated and all that they'll see is the word Caterham at the top of so many negative news articles.

Hopefully it will all be sorted soon.

JD

SteveSteveson

3,209 posts

162 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
forzaminardi said:
if he believes the other party have failed to fulfil their obligations, then clearly he believes he is still the owner; in which case he has to do the responsible thing and dip back into his pocket, to at least let the team see out the season with dignity.
As anyone who has had an argument about a V5 will tell you, ownership and legal responsibility are two very different things. Most probably the contract will have said "You take responsibility for everything in the team immediately, but I retain legal title until you have paid for it". Just like any other retention of title clause, just because you don't own it doesn't mean your not responsible for it.

I do feel sorry for the staff their and the damage this is doing to Caterham Cars (Although, possibly a case of no publicity is bad publicity). Hopefully this will all be sorted out, but the second I saw the F1 teams notice about "he hasn't passed us the shares" I thought I bet they haven't paid. Why else would he hold on to some bits of paper, which they could very quickly go to court to get transfered.

redroadster

1,729 posts

231 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
wonder if he,s going to give them there money back if they are not getting the shares or ownership of title . . . . . .,

Impasse

15,099 posts

240 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
forzaminardi said:


While we can huff and puff about Fernandes, I think in the main he is regarded as a fairly above-the-board kind of guy
rofl

forzaminardi

2,281 posts

186 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
JsyM3 said:
forzaminardi said:
If anonymity were an important issue for a consortium of presumably very wealthy people, then one has to wonder why they'd consider even the slightest involvement in F1 as something worth having.
Because they like motorsport and want to invest in it... Just because they don't want the publicity and any associated flack doesn't make it dodgy
All they do by not putting a name to the organisation is raise doubts and make the whole deal sound suspicious. I can appreciate them wanting to keep a low profile for whatever reason, but they ought appreciate that the mystery surrounding their identity and the source of their alleged funds simply raises doubt. In any enterprise, if you want to be taken seriously, then you have to step up to the mark. Simply naming the key people doesn't mean they have to throw a party to celebrate it, turn up to races and be interviewed by Eddie Jordan every five minutes.

forzaminardi

2,281 posts

186 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
Impasse said:
forzaminardi said:


While we can huff and puff about Fernandes, I think in the main he is regarded as a fairly above-the-board kind of guy
rofl
I don't think he is a saint by any means, nor do I think his behaviour in the whole Caterham business has been 100% morally correct, but Fernandes runs several very successful international businesses that are regarded as amongst the best in their field. I'm sure that he's done some things wrong and upset other people in the course of his career but who hasn't? Yes, he might have been more honourable in his disposal of Caterham, and he might have been less naive in his handling of the team or of QPR, but to the best of my knowledge there's no evidence to say he's someone who deliberately seeks to obfuscate or defraud. If there is then please contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way.

CraigyMc

16,313 posts

235 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
forzaminardi said:
he is regarded as a fairly above-the-board kind of guy
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a comedian!

forzaminardi

2,281 posts

186 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
CraigyMc said:
forzaminardi said:
he is regarded as a fairly above-the-board kind of guy
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a comedian!
Again, please enlighten me as to why I am wrong. As I say above, I don't think he's a saint, especially not in this particular instance but at the same time I've never seen or heard of anything to suggest he's a fundamentally dodgy character.

toppstuff

13,698 posts

246 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
CraigyMc said:
forzaminardi said:
he is regarded as a fairly above-the-board kind of guy
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a comedian!
Who clearly doesn't know much about the airline business and TF's activities in it... whistle

forzaminardi

2,281 posts

186 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
toppstuff said:
CraigyMc said:
forzaminardi said:
he is regarded as a fairly above-the-board kind of guy
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a comedian!
Who clearly doesn't know much about the airline business and TF's activities in it... whistle
Christ, we're all clever d*cks today aren't we? Does anyone actually have any firm evidence beyond "he's rich so he must be dodgy" or "I went on an Air Asia flight once and the meal was sh*t" or "I'm a QPR fan" to say Fernandes is a con-man? I'm not being trying to be funny, if there's some big news I'm not aware of then please tell me what it is!

Crafty_

13,248 posts

199 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
Fernandes put out a statement a little while ago stating that he and Caterham Group had no affiliation with the F1 team as he had sold it.

Clearly this is a complete lie, as he still owned CSL at the time and still does. Hes now admitting to lying by stating he still owns the shares.

He says that he held back the shares to ensure that the staff & creditors were looked after - well that worked well didn't it ? As legal owner is he going to look after them now then ? Or just scurry away in to the undergrowth ?

In reality he flogged the team to the first party that came along.

I don't understand why anyone would retain ownership of a company and take no active part in it (given legal responsibilities etc). especially when debts began to rack up.
Likewise I don't see the logic in the new 'owners' sinking money in to something they don't own.

I don't think either of the parties are in any way trustworthy, they are both at fault for the mess that has developed. I very much doubt if either of them is telling the whole truth over what has / hasn't been paid.

canucklehead

416 posts

145 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
seems to my uneducated, unlawyerly eye that the blame falls on both parties here. a deal was agreed, then it seems that money was not paid, in contravention of the agreement. or more likely, some money was paid, but each party was interpreting the terms of the agreement differently, so now one says 'i paid it all', the other says 'you ain't paid', and now both are saying 'not my fault'. while the poor schleps in the factory get the short end of the stick.

both sides should man up, admit they are party to the clustercuss they have created, and get together sort out this disagreement.

'course that is the one path of action that definitely won't happen, such is F1 in the 21st century.

DreadUK

206 posts

131 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
JD PH said:
As a former member of Caterham staff all I'd say is that - above all else - I feel sorry for the staff stuck in the middle of this. It must be like being a child stuck in the middle of a messy divorce.

Also, my former colleagues at Caterham Cars - whilst separate from all this to an extent - still have to deal with the fallout from the Caterham brand being dragged through the mud. A lot of people (including me) have worked very hard over the years to build the Caterham brand and seeing it associated with all this is a real shame. Hopefully people will understand the difference between the various entities... but I fear that the nuances may be lost on the uninitiated and all that they'll see is the word Caterham at the top of so many negative news articles.

Hopefully it will all be sorted soon.

JD
There will be little negative reflection on Caterham cars in my opinion from the enthusiasts that buy an excellent product. The guys 'suffering' are the F1 employees and in the main, they have their own network which revolves like any other employment pool.

The tragedy is, unfortunately, that F1 is seen by genuine knowledgable fans, as the cesspool it really is. However, the paying public that have been attracted by the celebrity hangers on's, fuelled by Bernies insatiable desire to promote the sport globally to people who don't know a con rod (no pun intended.....well maybe) from a laughing shaft just to fill his boots with yet more money, will neither know nor care.

They are, in the main, the punters who infest a sport just because its fashionable and trendy whilst the rest of us eschew football and darts for a sport that involves something more than brute force and beer to analyse.

The sooner F1 is brought to its knees the better, then we might get some genuine competition. And that time will be when Bernie falls off his perch because no one can quite carry off the slimy deals he seems to manage with aplomb.

Caterham F1 was doomed from the start. A cobbled together team running at the back of the pack with no prospects and failing to get the name they wanted. And even Lotus is now dying a slow death. Who in their right mind would invest billions in a team without a major manufacturer buying up a talented team a la Brawn. It looked from day one like a scam and nothing that has happened has disproven that assertion.

Hopefully Lotus will be next, then Marussia and Sauber and as the house of cards begins to fall there will be a breakaway formula with foundations in the present, not buried in the 1960's. It's long overdue. Long live the King!

Crafty_

13,248 posts

199 months

Friday 24th October 2014
quotequote all
DreadUK said:
then Marussia and Sauber and as the house of cards begins to fall there will be a breakaway formula with foundations in the present, not buried in the 1960's. It's long overdue. Long live the King!
A break away won't happen, because the teams don't trust each other, so it won't ever get organised.

I see the usual "Bernie is evil" stuff getting trotted out again. To be honest its getting a bit tiresome and doesn't paint a true picture of what really goes on.

If F1 is to change everyone has a part to play. If you simply left CVC earning £2.50 and passing all the rest of the money to teams nothing would change.

blearyeyedboy

6,252 posts

178 months

Saturday 25th October 2014
quotequote all
JD PH said:
Hopefully people will understand the difference between the various entities... but I fear that the nuances may be lost on the uninitiated and all that they'll see is the word Caterham at the top of so many negative news articles.
Fortunately, the uninitiated don't usually buy Caterhams anyway, though I take your point. Let's hope the whole sorry mess can be sorted with the fewest number of lawyers and least harm to employees as possible.

RoverP6B

4,338 posts

127 months

Saturday 25th October 2014
quotequote all
toppstuff said:
Who clearly doesn't know much about the airline business and TF's activities in it... whistle
Could you elucidate further please? I used to be involved in the airline business (ran Air Anglia/AirUK flight ops at Aberdeen in the late '70s into '80) and I try to keep abreast of what's going on in case I ever find myself back in that business (however unlikely it may be). As far as I was aware, AirAsia's reputation was no worse than any other comparable low-cost airline and better than some (e.g. Ryandontcair!)... Fernandes has always seemed like a reasonable guy to me...

Gary C

12,313 posts

178 months

Saturday 25th October 2014
quotequote all
.Friend of mine was caught up in the arrows débâcle when TWR was brought down. Staff were leaving the site with anything that was not tied down in lieu of wages