-
No matter the talk of technology transfer, engineering advancement etc etc these companies are expecting a marketing return from some of their investment, and I think it's fair to say that on that count Honda have not realised their expectations.
I agree on that, but has anyone looked good aside from Mercedes in that respect? Renault have moved up to 2nd worst due to Ferrari dropping the ball but that's about as positive as you can say for any of the non-Mercedes manufacturers.
Sure, they're not the best manufacturer out there, but they're the only ones anywhere near challenging a ridiculously dominant Mercedes team.
In short, I'm not surprised that they've pulled the plug. On the other hand, if every engine manufacturer behaved like that, the sport would die pretty quickly.
I'd be interested to see if there's any decent comparisons between the money they spend in F1 vs Indycar. While they're winning in Indycar and I'm sure that's a good marketing point in the US, it'd be interesting to see how that stacks up worldwide vs runner up in F1.
mmccarthy-
I read earlier that the F1 engine programme costs Honda €400M per year. No idea how much they then charge the teams.
I've seen mixed figures from the manufacturers tbh. You just don't know what they do and don't include in those costs. Mercedes will be supplying 3 customer teams next year so what does that mean, big direct income and their 'cost' looks low?
Jonny69
Oh, I agree that they've done very well - I'm a Honda F1 fan - but what I mean is the press, and the associated public opinion of their current stint in F1 hasn't exactly been great.
No matter the talk of technology transfer, engineering advancement etc etc these companies are expecting a marketing return from some of their investment, and I think it's fair to say that on that count Honda have not realised their expectations.