Ahead of the opening rounds of the 2018 European Formula 3 Championship, Blockchain market leaders, Dragon Corp, has announced a multiyear partnership with leading the Hitech F3 team. The partnership, which spans both the European and Asian F3 championships, forms a key element to Dragon’s increasing involvement in motorsport and sees the industry leaders supporting tomorrow’s stars of Formula One as they find their way up the motorsport ladder.
Commenting on the agreement Paul Moynan, Co-Founder of Dragon remarked: “Everybody at Dragon is very excited to begin this long-term partnership with Hitech GP. We have identified motorsport as a strategic avenue for growing awareness of our brand and the international reach of Hitech GP’s Formula 3 programmes offers significant visibility in our key markets.”
Following a series of strong performances in pre-season testing from young drivers, Enaam Ahmed, Alex Palou, and Ben Hingeley, Hitech head into the 2018 season as favourites.
Dragon’s partnership with Hitech builds on existing partnerships in motorsports established in Formula E with Championship Leaders, Techeetah, and in ELMS with Spa 6hrs Class winners G-Drive.
On the announcement, Hitech GP Team Principle Oliver Oakes commented:
“The relationship with Dragon represents our most significant partnership to date and offers significant long-term investment for our Formula 3 programmes. Dragon is a young and exciting company with big ambitions, and they recognise the value of motorsport’s global stage to grow their brand. We share their love of technology and innovation, and will work hard to ensure the partnership achieves our shared objectives on and off track.”
In the coming months, further details regarding Dragon’s involvement with Hitech in the Asian Formula 3 Championship alongside additional programmes with the Hitech GP team will be announced.
As the 2018 FIA Formula One World Championship heads to Barcelona, silly season is kicking into high gear. At present, when looking towards the 2019 season, the state of play for the likely top four finishers in the Constructors Championship this season is as follows:
Mercedes: both drivers out of contract
Ferrari: One seat open
Red Bull Racing: One seat open
Renault: both seats open
Being only four races into the 2018 season it may seem a little premature to be talking about 2019, but the events of Baku are likely to play a pivotal role in the decision-making process across the market.
With 99% certainty, it can be expected Lewis Hamilton will or has already renewed his commitment to Mercedes for 2019 and beyond in what will likely be his final contract as a driver in Formula One. Leaving a single seat with the Silver Arrows. Whilst many have questioned his outright ability to take the fight to his competitors, Bottas has proved to be a reliable second driver for the team. Lewis’ response towards his teammate after being gifted his first win of the year, illustrates a team working in cohesion. Management would have to think long and hard about what they were trying to achieve in looking to replace Bottas. I expect he will be retained for a third season unless Ocon finds himself without a seat at Force India.
Over at the Scuderia, Kimi has been in his final season since he rejoined the team in 2014. Whilst never stella, he again creates an environment in which his teammate can thrive. Arguably he weakens Ferrari’s ability to challenge for the constructor’s championship, but I personally believe he will either be renewed on another single year agreement, or make way for Charles le Clerc, who finally started to prove his strengths with a fantastic performance in Baku. I do not believe Ferrari are considering Ricciardo as a possible partner for to Vettel.
Then to the curious case of Red Bull Racing. In Baku, Max Verstappen and Daniel Ricciardo broke the golden rule of motorsport and took each other out. The incident was a long time coming, after a race in which multiple passes between the two had already resulted in contact, the drivers compromised their own strategies and slowed each other down. With the team standing by their philosophy to “let them race”. In the short term, I don’t believe this will destroy team harmony, but it went some way to sowing the seed in Riccardo’s mind that a team not willing to favour one driver over the other may not be the team in which he achieves his ambition of securing a world championship. This coupled with the widely expected announcement that Red Bull Racing will switch to Honda power for 2019, which whilst much more competitive with Toro Rosso than it ever was with McLaren may not quite be at the level to compete for championships.
Then to Renault, a team whose 3-year plan to reinvigorate the Enstone facility and rebuild a once championship contending team, is now starting to come to fruition. From 2019 onwards Renault should expect to be challenging for outright wins and comfortably challenge the likes of Mercedes and Ferrari. In Hulkenberg and Sainz the team have a formidable but unthreatening lineup. As the team look to challenge for wins, they need a superstar driver. Could Ricciardo become Renault’s next superstar? As a works team, they are in a position to offer the salary driver of Ricciardo’s calibre should command, and they can offer something no other team can, the ability to shape the team around him. Some will say it would be risky for Ricciardo to give up a race-winning seat for a team which hasn’t won a race in over a decade, but the same could be said for Lewis Hamilton when he walked away from McLaren. Renault presents opportunities Red Bull Racing simply can’t offer.
Should the top four teams be covered by four manufacturers, it would be fantastic to see the top four drivers of the current era; Hamilton, Vettel, Verstappen, and Ricciardo behind the wheel of different cars each with their own strengths and weaknesses.
Daniel Ricciardo racing for the Renault Sport F1 Team for 2019 is my prediction for the big shift this silly season. Sainz may well return to Red Bull fold as a result, but I personally believe he will remain with Renault with Hulkenberg heading to life after F1 and Gasly moving into the Red Bull Racing team.
In the aftermath of the 2018 Azerbaijan Grand Prix, which saw Aston Martin Red Bull Racing teammates Daniel Ricciardo and Max Verstappen collide after a race long battle for position, many questions have been raised as to how the team should respond and what happens next. When contemplating the options moving forward, opinions and viewpoints aren’t always based on a fair representation of a situation or the individuals involved.
Opinions and judgements from fans and in many cases the media as to the temperament and character of a driver are more often than not based on 2-3 minute sound bites from drivers over a race weekend. It is easy to build a false impression of a driver and their perspective on issues.
Over the past 12-24 months, long-form interviews in the form of independent podcasts have grown significantly in popularity, offering a platform for individuals to offer a greater level of insight into their personalities and what makes them tick. Earlier this year Natalie Pinkham launched her own series of podcasts “In the Pink” with Daniel Ricciardo being one of the first guests.
Recorded ahead of the 2018 season, the interview covers everything from his upbringing in Perth, his almost entirely trouble free, save for a small incident with superglue, school life, to his taste in music, and self-belief. When fans seek to understand the man behind the smile, and what may or may not be going through his head following the incident in Baku, they would do well to listen to this podcast.
It would be great to see other drivers follow Ricciardo’s lead and sit down for an hour or so to record an hour ‘in the Pink”!
To download Daniel Ricciardo’s’ interview with Natalie Pinkham or subscribe to ‘In the Pink’ on the Acast network follow this link.
Scuderia Ferrari secured their second victory of the 2018 Formula One World Championship in Bahrain yesterday, with Sebastian Vettel managing to extend the life of the soft tyre compound well beyond the Pirelli advised operating window. The four-time champion converting a two-stop strategy focused on pure pace into a one-stop endurance challenge in response to what many saw to have been a checkmate move from Mercedes with Bottas and a recovering Hamilton pitting for medium compound tyres after Vettel’s first stop. This demonstration of masterful tyre management and dynamic race strategy suggests a thrilling season is in prospect.
After the processional opening race of the season, the eventful Bahrain Grand Prix was a welcome relief for fans and media alike. Overtaking is possible in 2018! Away from the racing, another feature of the 2018 season that continued to grab the attention of commentators was the smoking Scuderia Ferrari and the Ferrari powered customer teams. Technically minded reporters suggest this feature of the 2018 Ferrari power unit is the result of the power unit solution employed by Ferrari to overcome additional restrictions on oil being used as fuel. Through 2017 the oil generating this ‘smoke’ would have been channelled back into the power unit and possibly improved performance, for 2018 Ferrari have elected to channel oil out of the car. Much to the frustration of any competitor lapping behind them.
Whilst the technical explanation is entirely logical, (albeit poorly explained in this article) there is an alternative school of thought around this new feature of Scuderia Ferrari. Ahead of the 2018 season, it was widely expected the scarlet team would feature branding from title partner Philip Morris International’s electric cigarette / vaping division IQOS. In fact livery designer extraordinaire Sean Bull put together this fantastic mockup livery around such an announcement:
Regional advertising restrictions around products containing tobacco likely put an end to these plans, but curiously around the same time as the 2018 launch, PMI announced an extension of its agreement with the Scuderia. Since 2008, when all tobacco advertising was banned in sports, PMI and Ferrari have sought to bypass these regulations through the use of suggestive images, such as barcodes mimicking the brand name Marlboro or team logos reflecting the Marlboro brand identity, is it possible the new smoking look to the 2018 Ferrari is a form of next level subliminal advertising?
IQOS stands for I Quit Ordinary Smoking. The IQOS device acts as a substitute for cigarettes, giving users the tobacco kick as cigarettes, with reduced health risks. During use, IQOS emits a harmless smoke cloud (seen here). Has Ferrari Team Principle and Former PMI Marketing Executive, Maurizio Arrivabene, created the ultimate subliminal advert for IQOS in developing a car to mimick the characteristics of the product a sponsor is seeking to promote?
Is it time to rename the Ferrari SF71-H the SFIQOS-H!?!
I’m conflicted. Last week I was sent an advance copy of the Amazon Prime documentary series Grand Prix Driver. This fantastic series offers previously unimaginable of levels of access to the McLaren F1 team as they prepare for the 2017 Formula One Season. Recorded over a period of four and a half months, Manish Pandey, Chris Connell, and Anwar Nuseibeh have produced an in-depth study into the life of a Formula One team with seemingly no topic being off limits. All of which, for a lifelong F1 fan such as myself, sounds incredible. So why am I conflicted?
It is said you should never meet your heroes. After watching Grand Prix Driver, I think this phase should be modified to ‘never watch a documentary about your heroes. I want to make it clear, the production values of the documentary are second to none. To gain the level of trust required to film some of the scenes depicted through the episodes is a testament to the passion, dedication and commitment of Manish Pandey and the team surrounding him. This series is a must-see for any fan of motorsport. Unfortunately, however, it’s also a must-see for anyone studying business management looking for examples of how not to run a successful business, and perhaps most importantly, for Toro Rosso and Red Bull Racing on how not to work with a Power Unit Partner.
If you have seen a trailer for the documentary, it will be clear the series charts the breakdown of the relationship between McLaren and Honda on the eve of the 2017 season.
Analysing the series and reflecting on narrative documented, I have tried to break down my assessment of the team into a few key sections.
The key rationale for the McLaren Honda partnership was that Ron Dennis and/ or the team felt it would not be possible for McLaren to challenge for world championships as a customer team. Logic and recent history suggest this assessment is absolutely correct. The mantra throughout the McLaren Honda partnership and throughout this series is that of “One Team” and “We win as a team; we lose as a team”. The documentary shows those words to be largely empty. Relations between McLaren and Honda employees at every level of the business seemed strained at all times. There is a constant feeling of us and them.
An interesting insight into teams using customer power units in Formula One is when the customer receives the power unit. As a customer team, power units very rarely enter the team facility. One unit will be made available for the first time the car is fired up ahead of the season. After this, Power Units will be delivered to the circuit by the supplier and taken away again at the end of a test or race weekend. The benefit of direct / works relationship with a power unit manufacturer should be these limitations are removed. Team and Power unit manufacturer work as one in parallel. Based on the Grand Prix Driver documentary, this unity was never achieved between McLaren and Honda.
The first time McLaren physically saw the 2017 power unit was in the days preceding the first fire up of the unit. This is not an integrated partnership. Heading into 2017, Honda were playing catch up, they decided to overhaul their design philosophy. This decision, it is implied, was one McLaren did not have a say in. After taking such a decision, communication between McLaren and Honda should have been continuous, when it came to installing the power unit there should have been no surprises. As the documentary will show, this was not the case, with components having to be re-engineered on the fly.
The relationship between McLaren and Honda was not a partnership. It was barely more than a customer relationship, where the supplier happened to be supplying power units free of charge.
In speaking to Manish Pandey about the documentary, the topic of humility came up. Manish’s view of humility was interesting. His perspective was that both Honda and McLaren demonstrated great humility as they prepared for the documentary. He and his team made several attempts to get the team to discuss ambitions for the season. Looking for the soundbite of ‘returning to the top step’ or ‘challenging for the championship’. No one offered such remarks. Manish’s view was that this demonstrates the team were realistic in their approach to the season, and on this, I agree.
However, as the McLaren Honda relationship fell apart around them, it was the team’s complete lack of humility that struck me. Throughout the entire series, no McLaren representative takes any level of accountability for the partnership failing. Honda is made entirely responsible for the shortcomings of the team performance. This is wrong. We’ve all had relationships that haven’t worked out, at no time is one party solely responsible for a relationship failing. It comes across as hugely arrogant of McLaren to place all the blame for their performance through the Honda partnership at the foot of the power unit manufacturer.
Honestly, I am amazed McLaren are happy for this lack of humility to be made public. At times I wasn’t sure if I was watching a documentary series set in Woking or a Mockumentary series from Slough.
In the opening episodes, meetings are filmed from outside rooms giving the viewer a feel for events taking place without the content being made public, by the final episode cameras have been invited into meeting with no talking points edited or removed. Whilst again, this is great access, being part of these meetings will be quite distressing for any fan of the sport. Time after time the viewer is shown milestone dates on timelines being missed or management interactions in which it seems almost impossible to offer a clear answer to basic questions. To me this again comes down to accountability, no one in the organisation seems willing to accept their role in the failure.
The topic of sponsorship or partners is something frequently addressed through the series. In a bid to highlight a new beginning for the McLaren team, it was decided that a departure from silver, grey and black tones in the car livery and team environment was required. The origins of this decision and influencing factors are a little conflicted in the series, but the message for change was clear. The ambition being a new livery concept will entice new sponsors to join a new McLaren.
For me, the professionalism around this decision is diminished somewhat by branding being applied on the eve of the launch in what appears to be a corridor. Nevertheless, the ambition is clearly communicated. This desire to rebrand after a challenging period also explains why McLaren are expected to reveal another new livery concept for the 2018 season.
The McLaren team has developed a strong reputation within the technologies sector for its work outside of Formula One in recent years. Major FMCG’s consult with the group on numerous challenges. The McLaren Formula One Team depicted in this documentary is not one many FMCG’s would look favourably upon. I do not believe the McLaren commercial team will look favourably on the way in which the team is portrayed.
Even Handed Approach
In my discussion with Manish Pandey, in an interview for Paddock Magazine (click here to head to the interview) I raised the question of the way in which McLaren and Honda were depicted within the series, highlighting my concern that Honda did not have the opportunity to offer their side of the story.
Understandably Manish did not hold my opinion. The narrative of a documentary is often defined by the events it covers from the perspective of the lead. This is not a Honda documentary. It is a McLaren documentary and the views within it are communicated as such. Again this is not a criticism of the documentary, more a reflection of the brief and the client.
I sincerely hope my interpretation of the McLaren team based on the series is not an accurate reflection of the way in which the business operates. 12 months have passed since this documentary was filmed. With new management structures in place, much-needed process and accountability may have been successfully implemented. I, like many other F1 fans, hope to see McLaren back at the front of the grid challenging for race wins. With The McLaren Team seen through this 2017 documentary, I doubt this would have been possible. Whatever the power unit.
Select motorsport related media outlets and a UK based news outlet have built themselves into a little bit of a frenzy over the past few days around possible similarities between the new Formula One logo and a possible logo for 3M brand Futuro.
It has been suggested Formula One may be facing difficulties around the use of their newly launched logo due to these possible similarities, and whilst it is true the shapes used to suggest the letter F in both the new Formula One logo and an image of Futuro product do bear a resemblance, it seems appropriate to add a little context to this continuing story.
Prior to launching the new Formula One logo Liberty Media will have secured all necessary trademark and copyright registrations to ensure no restrictions of use. This is standard practice. Any contest or conflict will have been addressed in private significantly ahead of launch.
With respect to the image of Futuro product with a similar logo, this logo is not currently used by the brand, as the brand website found here illustrates. Whilst the image circulating news outlets suggests the product may be on sale using this logo, it is likely the product shown is part of line trial by the business to review brand awareness when in a shop environment. ( a common trial completed when consumer goods explore rebranding products)
It is correct that 3M have registered the trademark with the European Union Intellectual Property Office, details of which can be found here. However, within this documentation, the categories under which 3M have registered the trademark are also clearly stated:
List of goods and services
Orthopedic articles; orthopedic braces and supports; orthopedic elastic bandages and wraps; orthopedic cervical collar; orthopedic sling; hot packs; cold packs; therapeutic hosiery; compression hosiery; anti-embolism hosiery; therapeutic arch supports; heat patch for application to skin for therapeutic purposes.
With such a limited scope, 3M would be unlikely to challenge the Liberty Media’s new logo for Formula One. Additionally, it should not be forgotten that the F1 logo contains the suggestion of 2 symbols, whereas the 3M logo suggests 1. It seems less likely still 3M would contest 50% of a logo.
If in the highly unlikely scenario 3M did take issue with the new Formula One logo and a similarity was determined, the most likely outcome would be that Liberty Media would be unable to offer branded products listed in the 3M registered trademark category. Simply put, Liberty Media might not be able to bring out those F1 branded compression stockings the world has been waiting for. Which I am sure is something that fans and Liberty Media will be able to come to terms with over time.
In a recent interview for Autosport, Scuderia Toro Rosso driver Piere Gasly commented:
“I don’t want to talk negative about Formula 1, because I think there are way too many people who are talking about it in a negative way, and it is a great series, great cars and people should be more positive about it.”
Perhaps its time for motorsport outlets, this site included, to take these comments on board. Rather than criticising the sport we choose to focus our lives on and strive to make a living within, we should seek to promote the sport and celebrate its successes.
Finally, the topic of logo similarities within the corporate world is nothing new, as a quick search for ‘similar corporate logos’ on Google or clicking here will reveal. If all these businesses found a way of making things work, its safe to say F1 will do the same.
Barely a day goes by without one of the leading motorsport websites publishing comments around the future plans for F1. From louder engines to racing game inspired car designs, 2021 will amaze and inspire a new generation of fans. All of which sounds great, but it’s 2018. There are 3 seasons of Formula One between now and the promised fantastical future. The landscape of the motorsport industry can and will change dramatically in 3 years. Can Formula One really afford to wait?
2017 saw the introduction of the current set of technical regulations guiding the sport. Whilst cars are visually more impressive than there predecessors with the dimensions of the cars and tyres increasing. An overall increased emphasis on aerodynamics has had a dramatic impact on drivers ability to overtake with the 2017 season seeing less than half the number of overtakes of 2016. At present, there appears to be no plan to address this issue, with the 2018 regulations seeing no modifications around aerodynamic regulations.
Mindful of a likely closer battle for wins, Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull Racing, may have focused the aerodynamic philosophies of their 2018 challengers around an ability to more closely follow a competitor, but without regulation changes a significant increase in overtaking from 2017 to 2018 is unlikely.
All this comes at a time the commercial positions of Formula One are coming under threat. Longstanding partners involved in the championship are defecting to the likes of Formula E or other sports, and at this time, prospects for new partnerships appear limited. With the Formula One business focusing their attentions towards 2021 why would a partner commit to the championship ahead of the ‘revolution’? The Formula One product from 2018 -2020 may be a difficult product to sell.
It is possible, Formula One management are focusing taking a strategy of focusing to the future with the view and expectation of teams demanding an earlier introduction of new regulations. With the Season 5 Formula E car set to make its public debut in the coming weeks, and Indycar looking strong with a new car concept, competition between championships is ever growing. Can Formula One and the teams committed to its success afford to wait another 3 years for change?
Following in the footsteps of fellow former World Champion Nico Rosberg, Jenson Button has launched his own YouTube channel to chronicle his adventures post F1.
VLOG001, released earlier today, features Button and his crew heading to Sepang to test the Super GT Honda NSX he plans to race through 2018. Adopting a style similar to that of Jon Olsson, Button offers almost behind the scenes like insights into his life alongside glamour shots coupled with a chilled soundtrack.
Similar to the only professional racing driver I’ve had the pleasure to share a car with, early on in the Vlog, Button demonstrates the true level of respect racing drivers have for the handbrake of rental cars…
Vlogging, similar to blogging, or podcasting allows the host to present themselves to an audience in a way in which they feel most comfortable. Free from broadcast restrictions, hosts control what they share and when they share it. That being said, this being Button’s first post, the extent to which he posts content through his channel and the amount of his daily life he chooses to share remains to be seen.
Similar to Nico Rosberg’s YouTube Channel, Button’s motive behind this level of engagement isn’t overtly clear. Fan’s will appreciate the access and the feeling of inclusion, beyond this, as Jon Olsson will attest, developing a following in the Vlogging space can prove extremely lucrative and facilitate the fulfilment of the most unthinkable personal goals. (check out Jon Olsson’s Youtube Channel here for more)
The Liberty Media vision for the future of Formula One Teams is clear. The owners expect 12 commercially viable, profitable, franchises all capable of challenging for race victories. In his role as Managing Director of Motorsports, Ross Brawn, has been mandated with the task of delivering a strategy to ensure this vision is achieved.
12 commercially viable & profitable teams, on paper, sounds fantastic. With the variable of available finances removed, the resourceful nature of F1 teams will truly be put to the test. Outwardly it seems as though there is widespread support from the teams for such a move. Afterall, what business wants to spend more money? With representatives from leading teams including Red Bull Racing emploring Liberty Media to ‘ Save F1 Teams from themselves’ the route to implementing a budget cap should, in theory, be straightforward.
However, As with any commercial decision in Formula One nothing is straightforward. The first major hurdle to overcome is the existing structure around payments and the legacy of disparity. In 2017 Joe Saward explained the complexities around the current structure in this article. The existing structure rewards success and longevity, a something which is not overly inviting to a new team, nor geared towards a midfield team ever being in a position to surprise. In an estimated payment fund of $900M per season, the top 3 teams receive approximately 60% of the revenue, leaving the remaining, currently 7, teams to compete for 40% ($360M) between them. It is estimated that the smallest operational budget in F1 today is in the region of $100M, with only $50M coming from the championship, teams have a significant shortfall to cover.
A more appropriate payment structure would be equal distribution amongst all teams, with a proportional bonus for constructors championship position, similar to that seen in the Premier league as detailed here. Unfortunately, in order to reach this point, the largest teams, with operational budgets believed to be in excess of $400M per season must agree to a cut in support from the system under which their team structure has been developed. What business would agree to lose as much as 50% of its funding without a clear view of how it will cut costs or increase revenue through other ventures.
Convincing; Red Bull Racing, Scuderia Ferrari, and Mercedes Grand Prix to agree to this change will be one of the key tasks ahead of Ross Brawn through 2018 and 2019 if a new system is to be introduced under the new commercial vision for the sport in 2020.
The task is far from simple, the infrastructure of the top teams has been built around a mindset of a limitless budget. If a budget cap of $150m per season were to be introduced in 2020 with no consultation from the teams, it would be almost impossible for the top teams to comply. From a personnel headcount perspective alone a team such a Mercedes Grand Prix, with in excess of 1400 employees, if an average salary of $50,000 is applied, the team commit 46% of its budget to salaries before considering building a car. Without modifying the current team structure, introducing a budget cap within the next 3 seasons, unless Liberty Media expect teams to make more than 50% of their workforce redundant, is not feasible.
On a more positive note, there are indications that the top teams in question are preparing for the change. A budget cap in Formula One will not mean that the likes of operating entity such as Mercedes Grand Prix or Red Bull Racing will be limited to an expenditure of $150M per season, rather their allocation of resources to F1 will see this limit applied.
As a result, it is highly likely that diversification will be a key element to the future of F1 Teams. Over the past decade, McLaren and Williams have established an industry-leading position in the application of engineering solutions developed to improve performance in motorsport being incorporated into manufacturing processes and commercial entities. For these teams, this third-party business will likely continue to grow. it is, however, unlikely Ferrari or Red Bull Racing will view this as an appropriate use of resources or brand credibility.
Instead, expect the very top teams to move towards expanding their foothold in other forms of motorsport.
Mercedes Grand Prix has already made steps in this direction with the announcement of a commitment to Formula E team from season 6 of the championship. This alongside the development of the Mercedes Project One, which to many is a clear indication of Mercedes ambitions to return to Endurance Racing. A return which with LMP1 regulations under review and the prospect of the reinvigoration of the FIA Global Engine strategy, Mercedes are well positioned to find success.
Similarly, Red Bull Racing through their partnership with Aston Martin has acknowledged an interest in taking the Valkyrie racing, and under guidance from Ross Brawn will no doubt be seeking to bring the Toro Rosso team entirely in-house.
McLaren has taken the decision to take control of their GT programme, and have already explored further engagements in championships including Indycar following the positive coverage generated through the one-off partnership with Andretti Autosport at the Indy 500 in 2017.
Ferrari continually talks of a return to Endurance Racing, and could, similar to Red Bull Racing consider a strategy of an in-house B-team with which budget cap compliance could be achieved.
In conclusion, political posturing between the top teams in Formula One, Ross Brawn, and Liberty Media throughout the 2018-19 seasons will likely overshadow on-track performances. Fans of the sport should take any empty threats from top teams to walk away from the sport as just that. Empty threats. The financial implications of such a move make the option unviable. Instead, teams will double down on motorsport, getting involved with more championships, with the eventual winner being the fans.
McLaren has confirmed that Renault will not be referenced in the official team name designation for the 2018 season. Whilst Renault branding will feature within the team environment and livery as would be expected in a customer power unit relationship, the team will not be referred to as McLaren Renault.
As speculated on this site in September 2017, such a move will facilitate a single focus for the McLaren brand and enable consistent naming conventions should the team implement its own Power Unit solution under future F1 regulations. Unlike fellow Renault customers, Red Bull Racing, McLaren have not taken the route of rebadging their Power Unit.
The Renault Power Unit supplied to Red Bull Racing has been badged TAG Heuer since 2016, in an agreement which saw the LVMH owned brand end a long-standing partnership with McLaren switching to the Milton Keynes based team.
The naming convention surrounding Toro Rosso’s relationship with power unit partner Honda is yet to be confirmed.