Rich Energy drop Haas. No...Really. Seriously...
Discussion
Had to go on a rare trip to the Sun's website to find more Storey lunacy from yesterday:
Storey told SunSport: “We terminated them. Unfortunate but logical decision in light of events.”
He added: “Haas [are] nice people but the car is going backwards.
“We are a superior product to Red Bull.
“A milkfloat at back of grid a disaster for us. End of.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/motorsport/9483957/...
Storey told SunSport: “We terminated them. Unfortunate but logical decision in light of events.”
He added: “Haas [are] nice people but the car is going backwards.
“We are a superior product to Red Bull.
“A milkfloat at back of grid a disaster for us. End of.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/motorsport/9483957/...
Teppic said:
Taken from reddit:
“Whyte Bikes have not been paid the £35,416 due to them from Rich Energy, William Storey & Staxoweb.
Yep, all over the F1 web sites now“Whyte Bikes have not been paid the £35,416 due to them from Rich Energy, William Storey & Staxoweb.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/whyte-bikes-ric...
This really is a train wreck, but so bad I can't wait for the next mad episode. I don't do soaps, but I love a shaggy dog Storey gone horrendously wrong.
StevieBee said:
Well, they've got £580 quid in the bank and a management team comprising a pub landlord*, a computer consultant and a kip fit instructor.
Everything you'd expect of a top flight sponsor in F1
The £580 was as at 30 September 2017. Everything you'd expect of a top flight sponsor in F1
- Pub Landlord has resigned but worthy of mention!
Big Nanas said:
Europa1 said:
What analysis do you want beyond what's on that page, exactly?
Ok, well I don't understand it - now that you've made me look stupid, does that information provide any useful information relevant to this thread?Short answer to "any useful information relevant to this thread?" Probably not.
The info posted is a trawl from Companies House documents, so some of it won't be that up to date - the financials, for example, are from the accounts for their financial year ended 30 September 2017.
Interestingly, they extended their next accounting period from 30 September 2018 to 31 March 2019 (the longest they could extend it), which has the corresponding effect of pushing back the deadline for filing the accounts.
According to Companies House, as at 20 August last year, they had 100 ordinary shares issued, 64 held by William Storey, 12 by Brandsellers Holdings Ltd, 10 by Charlie Simpson, 10 by Robert Lee, 2 by Lloyd Tunicliffe, and 2 by Neville Weston. The solicitors' letter published by Rich Energy and shown a page or 2 back was to a Neville Weston.
Edited by Europa1 on Friday 12th July 20:27
Thanks for the info, Europa. I probably should have worded my question better!
It’s not my area of expertise, so I was keen not to look at the figures with amusement.
The figures here would’ve been more relevant when they were negotiating the sponsorship deal with Haas, so one assumes they knew a bit more than the figures tell to a layman.
Also, if Storey is the majority shareholder, how can he possibly be forced out? (Again probably not the right question)
It’s not my area of expertise, so I was keen not to look at the figures with amusement.
The figures here would’ve been more relevant when they were negotiating the sponsorship deal with Haas, so one assumes they knew a bit more than the figures tell to a layman.
Also, if Storey is the majority shareholder, how can he possibly be forced out? (Again probably not the right question)
Big Nanas said:
Thanks for the info, Europa. I probably should have worded my question better!
It’s not my area of expertise, so I was keen not to look at the figures with amusement.
The figures here would’ve been more relevant when they were negotiating the sponsorship deal with Haas, so one assumes they knew a bit more than the figures tell to a layman.
Also, if Storey is the majority shareholder, how can he possibly be forced out? (Again probably not the right question)
It’s not my area of expertise, so I was keen not to look at the figures with amusement.
The figures here would’ve been more relevant when they were negotiating the sponsorship deal with Haas, so one assumes they knew a bit more than the figures tell to a layman.
Also, if Storey is the majority shareholder, how can he possibly be forced out? (Again probably not the right question)
Those figures would have been wildly out of date even then - the sponsorship agreement was apparently signed in October 2018.
I'd be fascinated to know what numbers (other than the infamous 90m cans!) they were touting to Williams and Haas, and which they touted to whichever bank has supposedly guaranteed the sponsorship payments.
As Storey is the majority shareholder, it's hard to see how he could be forced out, as the letter from Haas' solicitors states.
Europa1 said:
I'm not so sure. It could of course be a tactic, but Haas apparently has concerns as to Rich Energy's solvency.
From the reports at the time (Joe Saward, etc) I think the banks have underwritten some or all of the first year.The backers are fairly experienced. Justin King is no fool.
The longer term may be in serious question though I agree.
Europa1 said:
StevieBee said:
Well, they've got £580 quid in the bank and a management team comprising a pub landlord*, a computer consultant and a kip fit instructor.
Everything you'd expect of a top flight sponsor in F1
The £580 was as at 30 September 2017. Everything you'd expect of a top flight sponsor in F1
- Pub Landlord has resigned but worthy of mention!
Vaud said:
Europa1 said:
I'm not so sure. It could of course be a tactic, but Haas apparently has concerns as to Rich Energy's solvency.
From the reports at the time (Joe Saward, etc) I think the banks have underwritten some or all of the first year.The backers are fairly experienced. Justin King is no fool.
The longer term may be in serious question though I agree.
"Furthermore there is the outstanding claim for damages against the company for copyright infringement in relation to its logo so that our clients so that our clients [Haas] are rightly concerned about the solvency/ongoing viability of the company [Rich Energy Ltd]".
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff