Adrian Newey to Ferrari? Is it possible?
Discussion
8Ace said:
Leithen said:
Newey goes, taking advantage of clauses in his contract made relevant by Horner’s behaviour. Despite Wolff’s best efforts he heads to Modena.
Verstappen leaves immediately and goes to Mercedes due to clauses in his contract activated by Newey’s departure.
Sainz replaces Verstappen and wins the 2025 drivers championship. Leclerc finds Hamilton a handful and is not happy.
The Red Bull Powertrains PU is a dog and RB find themselves scrapping for points in 2026. Without Cowell, the Merc PU isn’t much better. Jos and Toto occupy opposite ends of pit garages and glare at each other.
The Ferrari PU is a rocket, Newey works his magic and Hamilton wins the next three WC’s whilst Leclerc wonders where it all went wrong.
I am IN. I have a feeling that the 26 RB is going to be uncompetitive in any case, due to the engine. Verstappen leaves immediately and goes to Mercedes due to clauses in his contract activated by Newey’s departure.
Sainz replaces Verstappen and wins the 2025 drivers championship. Leclerc finds Hamilton a handful and is not happy.
The Red Bull Powertrains PU is a dog and RB find themselves scrapping for points in 2026. Without Cowell, the Merc PU isn’t much better. Jos and Toto occupy opposite ends of pit garages and glare at each other.
The Ferrari PU is a rocket, Newey works his magic and Hamilton wins the next three WC’s whilst Leclerc wonders where it all went wrong.
All this has reignited my interest in F1 to a mighty extent. Not so much for the 2024 season though.
Forester1965 said:
The most recent example I can find of Red Bull and senior leavers is Dan Fallows to Aston in 2001/2. Fallows was taken to the High Court by Red Bull and there wasna preliminary hearing regards disclosure.
What came from it was that Red Bull have generally let senior leavers go on a case by case basis by negotiation. That's what happened with Fallows, as his case was settled before going to trial in early 2022 and he joined Aston Martin early. It would only be conjecture but I suspect Aston paid a sum to make it happen. The other reason it might settle before trial is that if it went against Red Bull, I imagine most of their senior people had similar contracts and would've discovered they weren't as restricted as they'd thought. It would make sense for Red Bull to avoid risking the court confirming staff could leave more easily than they thought.
With Newey, the issue is more complex, because he's a 'one-off'. Not just at Red Bull, but in the sport more generally. What he knows not only about the card but the strengths and weaknesses of Red Bull more generally, is invaluable to competitors and potentially very harmful to Red Bull. The difference between 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the Constructors' is 10s of millions of dollars. It's easy to see why money alone wouldn't be enough to release Newey early, if doing so risked your future performance and prize money (bearing in mind also your sponsorship potential is less potent if you no longer have the P1 WDC/WCC).
I'd guess at a sabbatical unless someone can offer enough cash to turn heads or the Thai owners decide Newey has done enough for them over the past couple of decades that he's earned the move.
An excellent example of the legal process, and remember RB will also at other times be on the recruitment end of the situation. RB will never push legals to the extreme, cos what goes around will come around all too soon. What came from it was that Red Bull have generally let senior leavers go on a case by case basis by negotiation. That's what happened with Fallows, as his case was settled before going to trial in early 2022 and he joined Aston Martin early. It would only be conjecture but I suspect Aston paid a sum to make it happen. The other reason it might settle before trial is that if it went against Red Bull, I imagine most of their senior people had similar contracts and would've discovered they weren't as restricted as they'd thought. It would make sense for Red Bull to avoid risking the court confirming staff could leave more easily than they thought.
With Newey, the issue is more complex, because he's a 'one-off'. Not just at Red Bull, but in the sport more generally. What he knows not only about the card but the strengths and weaknesses of Red Bull more generally, is invaluable to competitors and potentially very harmful to Red Bull. The difference between 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the Constructors' is 10s of millions of dollars. It's easy to see why money alone wouldn't be enough to release Newey early, if doing so risked your future performance and prize money (bearing in mind also your sponsorship potential is less potent if you no longer have the P1 WDC/WCC).
I'd guess at a sabbatical unless someone can offer enough cash to turn heads or the Thai owners decide Newey has done enough for them over the past couple of decades that he's earned the move.
Cases turn on the sensitivity and value of the trade secrets the employee (assuming Newey even is one) holds. May explain Newey's timing to jump now when work will not yet have started on the 2026 car whilst teams wait for regs publication. Any work RB allocate to Newey on 2026 will now be at their own risk. The courts wont generally prevent a skilled worker from working; any restrictions must be reasonably necessary to protect trade secrets and legitimate commercial interests where the burden of proof is on the employer.
Anyway Newey has moved teams before, so will know the pack drill. Unlikely RB will ever be able to force him unwillingly to sit out multiple years.
HocusPocus said:
Plus those suggesting dissolving Ltd1 should study the insolvency process and what happens to contract obligations upon appointment of a liquidator. They don't just evaporate.
It does not need to be "insolvent" and I am sure it is not insolvent. But a Ltd company can be closed at will you agree do you not? ZX10R NIN said:
8Ace said:
Leithen said:
Newey goes, taking advantage of clauses in his contract made relevant by Horner’s behaviour. Despite Wolff’s best efforts he heads to Modena.
Verstappen leaves immediately and goes to Mercedes due to clauses in his contract activated by Newey’s departure.
Sainz replaces Verstappen and wins the 2025 drivers championship. Leclerc finds Hamilton a handful and is not happy.
The Red Bull Powertrains PU is a dog and RB find themselves scrapping for points in 2026. Without Cowell, the Merc PU isn’t much better. Jos and Toto occupy opposite ends of pit garages and glare at each other.
The Ferrari PU is a rocket, Newey works his magic and Hamilton wins the next three WC’s whilst Leclerc wonders where it all went wrong.
I am IN. I have a feeling that the 26 RB is going to be uncompetitive in any case, due to the engine. Verstappen leaves immediately and goes to Mercedes due to clauses in his contract activated by Newey’s departure.
Sainz replaces Verstappen and wins the 2025 drivers championship. Leclerc finds Hamilton a handful and is not happy.
The Red Bull Powertrains PU is a dog and RB find themselves scrapping for points in 2026. Without Cowell, the Merc PU isn’t much better. Jos and Toto occupy opposite ends of pit garages and glare at each other.
The Ferrari PU is a rocket, Newey works his magic and Hamilton wins the next three WC’s whilst Leclerc wonders where it all went wrong.
All this has reignited my interest in F1 to a mighty extent. Not so much for the 2024 season though.
Forester1965 said:
Jasandjules said:
But a Ltd company can be closed at will you agree do you not?
Hence why RB wouldn't leave themselves exposed to that possibility. Also, I'm told, restraint of trade could come into the equation. The big test is not what's in the contract but whether it is 'reasonable', the arbiter of reasonable being a court. Or, in the case of F1, a series of courts.
I'm just repeating what has been suggested by a legally qualified F1 nerd, so please don't pillory me.
HocusPocus said:
Forester1965 said:
The most recent example I can find of Red Bull and senior leavers is Dan Fallows to Aston in 2001/2. Fallows was taken to the High Court by Red Bull and there wasna preliminary hearing regards disclosure.
What came from it was that Red Bull have generally let senior leavers go on a case by case basis by negotiation. That's what happened with Fallows, as his case was settled before going to trial in early 2022 and he joined Aston Martin early. It would only be conjecture but I suspect Aston paid a sum to make it happen. The other reason it might settle before trial is that if it went against Red Bull, I imagine most of their senior people had similar contracts and would've discovered they weren't as restricted as they'd thought. It would make sense for Red Bull to avoid risking the court confirming staff could leave more easily than they thought.
With Newey, the issue is more complex, because he's a 'one-off'. Not just at Red Bull, but in the sport more generally. What he knows not only about the card but the strengths and weaknesses of Red Bull more generally, is invaluable to competitors and potentially very harmful to Red Bull. The difference between 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the Constructors' is 10s of millions of dollars. It's easy to see why money alone wouldn't be enough to release Newey early, if doing so risked your future performance and prize money (bearing in mind also your sponsorship potential is less potent if you no longer have the P1 WDC/WCC).
I'd guess at a sabbatical unless someone can offer enough cash to turn heads or the Thai owners decide Newey has done enough for them over the past couple of decades that he's earned the move.
An excellent example of the legal process, and remember RB will also at other times be on the recruitment end of the situation. RB will never push legals to the extreme, cos what goes around will come around all too soon. What came from it was that Red Bull have generally let senior leavers go on a case by case basis by negotiation. That's what happened with Fallows, as his case was settled before going to trial in early 2022 and he joined Aston Martin early. It would only be conjecture but I suspect Aston paid a sum to make it happen. The other reason it might settle before trial is that if it went against Red Bull, I imagine most of their senior people had similar contracts and would've discovered they weren't as restricted as they'd thought. It would make sense for Red Bull to avoid risking the court confirming staff could leave more easily than they thought.
With Newey, the issue is more complex, because he's a 'one-off'. Not just at Red Bull, but in the sport more generally. What he knows not only about the card but the strengths and weaknesses of Red Bull more generally, is invaluable to competitors and potentially very harmful to Red Bull. The difference between 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the Constructors' is 10s of millions of dollars. It's easy to see why money alone wouldn't be enough to release Newey early, if doing so risked your future performance and prize money (bearing in mind also your sponsorship potential is less potent if you no longer have the P1 WDC/WCC).
I'd guess at a sabbatical unless someone can offer enough cash to turn heads or the Thai owners decide Newey has done enough for them over the past couple of decades that he's earned the move.
Cases turn on the sensitivity and value of the trade secrets the employee (assuming Newey even is one) holds. May explain Newey's timing to jump now when work will not yet have started on the 2026 car whilst teams wait for regs publication. Any work RB allocate to Newey on 2026 will now be at their own risk. The courts wont generally prevent a skilled worker from working; any restrictions must be reasonably necessary to protect trade secrets and legitimate commercial interests where the burden of proof is on the employer.
Anyway Newey has moved teams before, so will know the pack drill. Unlikely RB will ever be able to force him unwillingly to sit out multiple years.
Jasandjules said:
HocusPocus said:
Plus those suggesting dissolving Ltd1 should study the insolvency process and what happens to contract obligations upon appointment of a liquidator. They don't just evaporate.
It does not need to be "insolvent" and I am sure it is not insolvent. But a Ltd company can be closed at will you agree do you not? PhilAsia said:
IMHO, Newey would know his worth and would have held the cards for all his demands. Red Bull, knowing his worth, would want him in their team and acceded to his demands, before he went elsewhere.
Probably too simplistic, but...
Oh he’s definitely getting paid, irrespective of the work he’s doing. Red Bull would rather pay him £1m a month, outside the cost cap, to be sitting on his fancy new boat, than working for a competitor. Probably too simplistic, but...
Sandpit Steve said:
PhilAsia said:
IMHO, Newey would know his worth and would have held the cards for all his demands. Red Bull, knowing his worth, would want him in their team and acceded to his demands, before he went elsewhere.
Probably too simplistic, but...
Oh he’s definitely getting paid, irrespective of the work he’s doing. Red Bull would rather pay him £1m a month, outside the cost cap, to be sitting on his fancy new boat, than working for a competitor. Probably too simplistic, but...
PhilAsia said:
Sandpit Steve said:
PhilAsia said:
IMHO, Newey would know his worth and would have held the cards for all his demands. Red Bull, knowing his worth, would want him in their team and acceded to his demands, before he went elsewhere.
Probably too simplistic, but...
Oh he’s definitely getting paid, irrespective of the work he’s doing. Red Bull would rather pay him £1m a month, outside the cost cap, to be sitting on his fancy new boat, than working for a competitor. Probably too simplistic, but...
TheDeuce said:
PhilAsia said:
Sandpit Steve said:
PhilAsia said:
IMHO, Newey would know his worth and would have held the cards for all his demands. Red Bull, knowing his worth, would want him in their team and acceded to his demands, before he went elsewhere.
Probably too simplistic, but...
Oh he’s definitely getting paid, irrespective of the work he’s doing. Red Bull would rather pay him £1m a month, outside the cost cap, to be sitting on his fancy new boat, than working for a competitor. Probably too simplistic, but...
PhilAsia said:
The point I was trying to (badly) make Steve, was that he could write how/what/when/where/why he could leave into the terms of the contract...and RBR would have to accede to his demands, otherwise he would go elsewhere.
He would never have had that much bargaining power. What's the point of paying anyone tens of millions a year if they can up sticks at any point and share all your IP with your closest rivals? You'd have paid your own money to develop competitors' cars.In the event we know he doesn't have that contractual freedom because it's been pointed out by RB.
Forester1965 said:
PhilAsia said:
The point I was trying to (badly) make Steve, was that he could write how/what/when/where/why he could leave into the terms of the contract...and RBR would have to accede to his demands, otherwise he would go elsewhere.
He would never have had that much bargaining power. What's the point of paying anyone tens of millions a year if they can up sticks at any point and share all your IP with your closest rivals? You'd have paid your own money to develop competitors' cars.In the event we know he doesn't have that contractual freedom because it's been pointed out by RB.
But after so many successful car years he's plainly very valuable and they would continue to employ his services even if he did refuse the compete terms they wanted. What are they doing to do, find a better head of design..?
If he no longer wants to work for them, he's not going to work for them. What kind of quality is a want-away staff member going to produce? Whether they're the best in the marketplace is irrelevant if they don't want to be there.
The tool left for Red Bull is the contract. They can use it to enforce the minimum contractual term and provide him work to do away from F1 (as they've done with other senior design staff to see out their contracts). Unlikely result here I think but it's a line they'll stick to because they have to stick to the contractual line.
The real negotiation is how long Newey sits on the sidelines after leaving. If I were RB I wouldn't want Newey joining a rival until the 2026 car was baked in. If I had to guess an outcome (assuming he does leave RB and doesn't retire) it ends up being after August '25.
The tool left for Red Bull is the contract. They can use it to enforce the minimum contractual term and provide him work to do away from F1 (as they've done with other senior design staff to see out their contracts). Unlikely result here I think but it's a line they'll stick to because they have to stick to the contractual line.
The real negotiation is how long Newey sits on the sidelines after leaving. If I were RB I wouldn't want Newey joining a rival until the 2026 car was baked in. If I had to guess an outcome (assuming he does leave RB and doesn't retire) it ends up being after August '25.
TheDeuce said:
But after so many successful car years he's plainly very valuable and they would continue to employ his services even if he did refuse the compete terms they wanted. What are they doing to do, find a better head of design..?
You don't just accede to all demands because someone is the best at what they do. Newey wasn't doing it out of the good of his heart. He's been paid £100s of millions to design IP for Red Bull. In return he agreed to a contract that commited him to a minimum term and restricted what he could do when he wanted to leave.HocusPocus said:
In order to have a solvent winding up, a director has to confirm all liabilities have been covered, which includes any contractual obligations. If all liabilities have been fully dealt with, no problem, members voluntary liquidation to wind up. If not, then creditors voluntary liquidation rules .. Look it up.
https://www.contractorcalculator.co.uk/contractors_close_down_limited_company.aspxGassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff