Obligation to supply
Discussion
Does anyone else think the recent Obligation to supply regulation for engines is a bad idea? How long before the entire grid is comprised of Mercedes powerplants?
http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/338993/marko-re...
http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/338993/marko-re...
I don't think the "obligation to supply" means that anyone can have any engine they want.
I was under the impression that if a team finds themselves without an engine contract, the engine manufacturer which is currently supporting the least teams would be obliged to sell to them, so at the moment that'd be Honda.
I was under the impression that if a team finds themselves without an engine contract, the engine manufacturer which is currently supporting the least teams would be obliged to sell to them, so at the moment that'd be Honda.
kambites said:
I don't think the "obligation to supply" means that anyone can have any engine they want.
I was under the impression that if a team finds themselves without an engine contract, the engine manufacturer which is currently supporting the least teams would be obliged to sell to them, so at the moment that'd be Honda.
That would make sense, I had visions of redbull basically strong-arming Mercedes into a supply i think its still wrong that the engine makers are being forced into it thoughI was under the impression that if a team finds themselves without an engine contract, the engine manufacturer which is currently supporting the least teams would be obliged to sell to them, so at the moment that'd be Honda.
kambites said:
It'll certainly put the engine suppliers who also run their own teams in the interesting position where they will have a vested interest in supplying the weaker teams so they don't get forced into supplying Redbull who probably have a better chassis than them. 
Could be interesting if Honda make a big step next year, unless they jump into bed with one of the smaller teams it theoretically means Red Bull could force themselves into a position where Honda are obliged to supply them with power units.It's b
ks. No-one can oblige a company to work with another - especially when it 's against the interests of one partner.
Examples - how could the FIA force someone to supply Sauber, when they are clearly a massive risk of default?
How can the FIA force Ferrari to supply Renault, if Renault demanded it? Clearly industrial secrets would be too big an issue.
The only stick the FIA have is to threaten to sanction an engine manufacturer - but what are they going to do? Chuck Merc out for not supplying RBR? They'd have no grid, and no product to sell. The only people they think they can bully is probably Honda, it if they do that they not only risk court re. Pre-existing contracts, but moreover guarantee no other manufacturer joins in future.
ks. No-one can oblige a company to work with another - especially when it 's against the interests of one partner.Examples - how could the FIA force someone to supply Sauber, when they are clearly a massive risk of default?
How can the FIA force Ferrari to supply Renault, if Renault demanded it? Clearly industrial secrets would be too big an issue.
The only stick the FIA have is to threaten to sanction an engine manufacturer - but what are they going to do? Chuck Merc out for not supplying RBR? They'd have no grid, and no product to sell. The only people they think they can bully is probably Honda, it if they do that they not only risk court re. Pre-existing contracts, but moreover guarantee no other manufacturer joins in future.
V40Vinnie said:
EnglishTony said:
According to Ron Dennis his contract with Honda guarantees exclusivity. Which makes the whole obligation to supply thing null & void.
True but i'm sure with the Bernie effect any contract becomes null and void anyway...Also isn't it the case that the FIA can only request supply from engine manufacturers that supply for less than 4 teams--so no Merc. I don't know where I read this... Need to find the source.
Point taken with Bernie. However I still don't see how he can make it stick. I'm any case it's only Red Bull that need it and unless they can convince Bernie that it's good for his pocket they can forget it.
Also Honda may even withdraw rather than carry the costs of supplying 2 or more teams
Also Honda may even withdraw rather than carry the costs of supplying 2 or more teams
EnglishTony said:
According to Ron Dennis his contract with Honda guarantees exclusivity. Which makes the whole obligation to supply thing null & void.
I doubt it. If the contract was exclusive why would Honda have started discussing a supply of engines with Red Bull last year? I suspect that McLaren's contract guarantees them "works" status (i.e. free engines) with some form of veto over potential customer teams.Some Gump said:
It's bks. No-one can oblige a company to work with another - especially when it 's against the interests of one partner.
Examples - how could the FIA force someone to supply Sauber, when they are clearly a massive risk of default?
How can the FIA force Ferrari to supply Renault, if Renault demanded it? Clearly industrial secrets would be too big an issue.
The only stick the FIA have is to threaten to sanction an engine manufacturer - but what are they going to do? Chuck Merc out for not supplying RBR? They'd have no grid, and no product to sell. The only people they think they can bully is probably Honda, it if they do that they not only risk court re. Pre-existing contracts, but moreover guarantee no other manufacturer joins in future.
In this context they can as the sporting regulations overrule the commercial stuff - if you don't like it then don't get involved in F1.ks. No-one can oblige a company to work with another - especially when it 's against the interests of one partner.Examples - how could the FIA force someone to supply Sauber, when they are clearly a massive risk of default?
How can the FIA force Ferrari to supply Renault, if Renault demanded it? Clearly industrial secrets would be too big an issue.
The only stick the FIA have is to threaten to sanction an engine manufacturer - but what are they going to do? Chuck Merc out for not supplying RBR? They'd have no grid, and no product to sell. The only people they think they can bully is probably Honda, it if they do that they not only risk court re. Pre-existing contracts, but moreover guarantee no other manufacturer joins in future.
Regarding potential default, that is an issue but can be mitigated by a contract requiring payment in advance and potentially even being underwritten by Bernie.
jamiebae said:
In this context they can as the sporting regulations overrule the commercial stuff - if you don't like it then don't get involved in F1.
Regarding potential default, that is an issue but can be mitigated by a contract requiring payment in advance and potentially even being underwritten by Bernie.
Not legally, they don't. The FIA are not lawmakers - they can only punish via sanction. Since they need the engine manufacturers, they can't sanction too harshly - so they have no teeth.Regarding potential default, that is an issue but can be mitigated by a contract requiring payment in advance and potentially even being underwritten by Bernie.
I'd also be amazed if Bernie was willing to bankroll another orginisation's decisions, to support an engine formula he doesn't want.
Some Gump said:
jamiebae said:
In this context they can as the sporting regulations overrule the commercial stuff - if you don't like it then don't get involved in F1.
Regarding potential default, that is an issue but can be mitigated by a contract requiring payment in advance and potentially even being underwritten by Bernie.
Not legally, they don't. The FIA are not lawmakers - they can only punish via sanction. Since they need the engine manufacturers, they can't sanction too harshly - so they have no teeth.Regarding potential default, that is an issue but can be mitigated by a contract requiring payment in advance and potentially even being underwritten by Bernie.
I'd also be amazed if Bernie was willing to bankroll another orginisation's decisions, to support an engine formula he doesn't want.
Neither Honda or McLaren have a god-given right to participate in F1, they do so at the invitation of the FIA and in so doing by agreeing to the FIA's sporting rules and regulations. Sure McLaren have a contract with Honda for exclusive engine supply but what good is it to McLaren to enforce that contracthave if it puts them in breach of their FIA contact and so sees them excluded from participating in F1?
I think people have read a lot more in to this rule than is really there. All it does is protect Red Bull from shoting themselves in the foot again. If they again back themselves in to a corner where they don't have an engine it's no longer possible for all the manufacturers to say "No". Nor though does the rule mean Red Bull can drop the Renault, sorry, I mean Tag Heuer engine and demand a Merc. or Fiat one just that one of Merc./Fiat/Honda/Renault must supply them - and it's basically going to be the supplier with the fewest customers so either Renault or Honda.
Edited by //j17 on Friday 13th May 09:50
ralphrj said:
I doubt it. If the contract was exclusive why would Honda have started discussing a supply of engines with Red Bull last year? I suspect that McLaren's contract guarantees them "works" status (i.e. free engines) with some form of veto over potential customer teams.
The deal was exclusive for 2 years. We are in year 2 of that deal. Honda have more or less said that given the current load on them, they'd rather just supply one team. Their PU is at least performing now but it seems hugely thirsty, given the comments from the drivers...Dennis was recently quoted as saying they won't supply another team until they win the World Championship.
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns33837.html
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns33837.html
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff