Just as the Lotus naming dispute heads to court today, it appears all is not well within the Team Lotus camp. It appears the long time custodian of the Team Lotus name, David Hunt is now at loggerheads with Team Owner, Tony Fernandes. He is alleging the latter is attempting to renegotiate the terms of the agreement in which Hunt was to offer the team assistance in preparation of their hearing against Group Lotus. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mo...-locked-in-dispute-over-payment-for-name.html http://www.theracedriver.com/2011/03/an-angry-david-hunt-speaks-out-about-team-lotus/ Hunt has generally avoided discussion over the whole Lotus saga and given his earlier single interview on the subject last year: http://www.theracedriver.com/2010/11/david-hunt-exclusive-on-team-lotus/ I'm inclined to believe his version of events are a fair reflection of the state of affairs. This is however, simply my own perspective and others should judge for themselves. Overall, its not a great day for Team Lotus - past or present incarnation.
Fernandes has now broken agreements with Group Lotus, the Chapman Family and David Hunt. The people he should have on board to make a sucessfull return of the Team Lotus brand. Instead he is making a mess of it and using it in the wrong way. What is he doing?
Agreed El Bando - I really can't understand why he's not keeping Mr Hunt happy and on side. Hunt is the one guy who knows ALL the details of Team Lotus's affair inside out. The Judge at the summary hearing in January even stated so!
I have a small amount of respect for Fernandes for his achievements, but he should just give up with the Team Lotus name. The guy has really made a mess of things.
Yep, he has messed up, but correct me if i'm wrong, does he not own the rights to the name, from which he brought from David Hunt? And it's really Group Lotus that are making a big fuss over it and being childish by stealing the classic livery from Team Lotus?
I think the problem is that he still owes Hunt money for the name? And now it seems he's tried to squeeze Hunt a bit, and thats backfired spectacularly. The results won't be public for at least 10 days though, so we'll have to wait and see. If things are going badly for Fernandez, I'm sure he'll give Hunt the money he's entitled to. However, if Fernandez doesn't seem to need Hunt any more, I imagine he'll try and screw him over further. Typical Businessmen. Overall though, all I want is for Team Lotus to still be able to call themselves Lotus, in one way or another, and that the entire farce doesn't cost the teams enough to impact on their cars performance.
But where's the soul in AirAsiaF1? Admittedly the same could be said for Force India, Virgin and HRT, but I like the fact that Team Lotus have such a rich history in the sport. It might not be the same team, but I think, having seen the tweets, facebook material, etc, from Team Lotus, that the ethos and philosophy have been continued.
F1McLaren - I think DHCanary sums it up pretty well. While Fernandes bought the rights from Hunt, he still owes the guy money for this. In addition, at the summary hearing last month, the Judge questioned why Hunt wasn't being referenced in any capacity by Team Lotus when outlining their arguments - after all, Hunt had spent the past 16 years fending off the attempts of Group Lotus from wresting the rights from him. DHCanary's hypothesis that Fernandes is probably thinking he can win the case without Hunt's participation (which may be the case) is probably on the money, however his behaviour is far from ethical. I previously had a high opinion of the Team Lotus principle but this causes me to reassess that. I do hope we see Team Lotus back on the F1 grid however, to do so in such a manner makes the current management almost as bad as the guys as Group Lotus attempting to pass themselves as their F1 counterparts.
"Where's the soul in AirAsia?" - Straight-forward, honest to goodness integrity! That's where! One wonders why he seems so averse to the idea. Is he somehow embarrassed about it? I always disagreed with Fernandes' marketing strategy which, in my opinion, was trashy in the extreme. And although I seemed at odds with most of the British public when the original mess became news - and especially following Renault's announcement of their revised plans (to become Lotus Renault), I have always felt his desire to smear someone else's badge on the nose of his car was as tacky as cheap gaffer tape. AirAsia Grand Prix does not sound that bad does it? Come on Fernandes, you're losing credibility every day. Time to cut the bull and call a spade a spade, lot a lotus leaf.
Ok, so the idea of buying the rights to the Team Lotus name may have been nothing more than a marketing ploy, but the claims of a lack of integrity can only be applied to Tony Fernandes. The rest of the team, the actual racing side of the business care passionately about what they are doing, and are determined to produce a competitive car with the budget and facilities they have. How many teams in F1 can you really say these days have their integrity intact anyway? Ferrari had the team orders scandal, Mclaren spygate, Red Bull and Mercedes favouritism issues, Williams and Force India were criticised (unfairly in my view) for employing pay drivers, Toro Rosso for being too closely linked with Red Bull by clever company organisation. I'm not saying all those are fair criticisms, but they exist, so I don't think you can say Team Lotus have no integrity because of their management. I used to work in a chip shop not far from the hingham base, and the engineers, etc, who occasionally came in were always talking about their jobs amongst themselves, and most of them were such nice guys, they definitely do not deserve their integrity questioned.
Hi Canary: I did not say "Team Lotus have no integrity", nor did I imply it! I am referring to the name and the perception of a name. I am not even speaking of Fernandes' integrity! - although I feel that allowing this to run and run is likely to do his long-term image no good. What I am saying is that by choosing a name which says something about the true origins of the team, they stand to gain credibility (to be perceived as having integrity), rather than lose it by plastering a sticker to their car and painting it someone else's colours. The team itself is a bunch of fantastic people, to whom I wish the utmost success. Their work ethic alone suggests that as a team of people, they have the utmost integrity. It is not their fault they have been working for a company which was taken over by someone who wanted to use someone else's name. But if I put an Aston Martin badge on one of my cars, no-one who knows about cars will be taken in by it and they will probably question why I did it. I am talking of the importance of the perception of a name. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Hey Cosi - I think I understand where you're coming from however I'm not sure your Aston Martin badge analogy holds. One could, by virtue of your argument, say that every new Lambo is in actual fact and Audi....which in turn is a VW? Or how about Skodas Fabias and SEAT Ibizas....merely VW Golfs in another guise? And then there's the Renault team dressing themselves up as something resembling the 4th greatest F1 team of all kind...something they have no real affinity or link with. We should accept takeovers and acquisitions happen all the time (after all Toleman became Benetton which then morphed into Renault itself). McLaren is in no way a reflection of the team that was set up by Bruce McLaren all those years ago and likewise Ferrari is now owned by FIAT and not Enzo. If Tony holds the intellectual rights to Team Lotus, then he has every right to use and market it in any way he wishes...and ultimately, no other team in F1 should be attempting to pass themself off as some kind of continuation to a legacy they have no rights over. What I take issue over is the way Fernandes appears to be conducting himself with his business partners - namely David Hunt. If you reach agreement with someone to do something for you, you should be honouring your commitments with that party...by reneging on this, he not only damages his own reputation but that of his team (regardless of what its called) - this is something I can not condone. Here's a dilemma for you - do you consider today's 'Mercedes' F1 team in any way a representation of the German car manufacturer? If so, why should the Silver Arrow be regarded as such when the team has had no previous link with automotive giant? One could be argue that Mercedes is simple sticking a badge on a car it has nothing to do with - it appears MANY people who know about cars have been 'taken in' by this and not many have questioned why they did this. Would you argue simply because Mercedes is a global corporation that this exercise is more legitimate than Tony Fernandes' efforts to brand his team as Team Lotus?
Hi Biffo! Good to see you here. Clearly I have made a mistake in mentioning the Aston Martin badge, since it allows a legitimate side-track I did not wish for. My point is this: I am averse to calling anything by a name which is not authentic. In this sense, I believe Fernandes should have used his own name, or utilised the name of the company which financed it (AirAsia) or left it as it was before he became involved - although the latter may not have been possible for legal reasons. But since I provoked your valid point, let's consider this: What did Ross Brawn do when he took over from Honda? What did Bruce McLaren do when he built his own F1 team? And the greatest name of all? - Although the red team could arguably be called Alfa Romeo, at least Enzo Ferrari had the courage to use his own name when he took the reigns! Fernandes attempt to evoke a veil of mystique over his brand had the all the subtlety of a prostitutes perfume. I wouldn't be surprised if he wanted to change his otherwise honest airline, Air Asia into 'Concorde' or 'Spitfire'!
