Marussia also to miss the next two races:


http://www.espn.co.uk/usa/motorsport/story/180877.html

Oh dear.

 

And Caterham.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/29770496

 

And all the Bridgestone runners will quit after one lap

 

All the deals are based upon a minimum of 20 cars racing and as Bernie is allegedly part-funding Caterham (perhaps even Marussia...) and is pulling his funding, there has to be a fall-back, hence all the noises about invoking the small print for teams to run three cars if required. Without 20 cars, all the venue deals and the tsunami of money suddenly stops.

This will-there-or-won't-there be thre car teams is why there's still the machinations about driver line-up.

Throw into the mix that Mr Red Bull is hinting he may pull Tora Rossa and this exacerbates the number of teams/cars racing debacle. So Ferrari may be strong-armed into entering a secondary team. Whether or not Mr Red Bull's threat is is for real may only be part of the power play...

 

Marussia in Administration too:

http://www.espn.co.uk/marussia/motor...ry/180949.html

How's Sauber doing?

 

Good news for Button, as he'd probably keep his seat if McLaren ran three cars.

I wonder if Ferrari and Mercedes are enviously looking at Red Bull's junior programme and the way they're able to bring through people like Verstappen/Kvyat/Ricciardo in the B team (Mercedes talked to Verstappen but couldn't have offered him anything) and would consider buying up one of the other teams to operate as their own B team.

 

 

Marussia, Caterham, and any other low budget non competitive teams should not in my opinion be in F1, what's the point?

 

I suppose every team jumped right in the constructors championship and took 1st place.

 

Exactly what the budget cap was supposed to address. Being up front is easy when you have near unlimited funding.