Some say any news is good news, but there’s no way to spin what’s happening at Williams as positive.
That Williams finally made it on track overnight (AEDT) would have come as a relief to some, but missing almost a third of preseason testing with less than a month until the first race of the season has put it about as far on the back foot as a team can get.
This is doubly meaningful for the much-loved heritage constructor, which had pegged 2019 as the first year in its regeneration after suffering its worst championship finish in history with tenth place last season.
“It’s definitely going to be next-gen Williams from 2019,” deputy team principal Claire Williams told Crash. “[2019] for us is going to be very much that we can push the reset button.”
Fielding the slowest car of 2018 and collecting a measly seven points should’ve meant the historic British marque couldn’t sink any lower, yet things are already looking grim at Grove.
The glitzy car launch with new title sponsor ROKiT, complete with a new livery and all-new driver line-up, was supposed to signify the first step towards recovery, but two days later the team confirmed it would miss its scheduled filming day, an event that in practice is used to shake down the car before testing begins.
“We have had an extremely aggressive engineering programme over the winter,” Claire Williams said in a statement. “As such, we have taken the decision not to run our car during our filming day this weekend in order to allow the team to maximise the time at the factory before we head to Barcelona for the first day of the test.”
This on its own is no major drama. Even Renault openly admitted that it was at risk of missing its filming day, and pushing development for as long as possible is part of the game.
But the matter moved from a minor curiosity to a notable problem when on Sunday, the day before the first morning of testing, Williams delayed the on-track debut of its car until Tuesday, and that notable problem became a significant issue when the team advised it was now not due to take to the track until Wednesday afternoon (last night AEDT) “at the earliest”.
Piling on the pressure are stories of low morale inside the team after simulations suggested the car is slower than expected, which in turn is amping up speculation on technical director Paddy Lowe’s position at the team after his first car last year proved such an emphatic disappointment.
Day 3 of Formula 1 winter testing at Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya in Montmeló, Spain; testing runs from 18 to 21 February 2019.
But for all the mutterings of crisis at Williams, the critical delay in getting the car onto the track is understandable in the greater context of this season, and it goes some way to describing some of the problems afflicting Formula One.
Williams is now in the unique position of being an independent constructor adrift in a sea of teams supported or sponsored by major automotive manufacturers (Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault, McLaren and Alfa Romeo), multibillion-dollar businesses (Red Bull Racing and Toro Rosso) or wealthy benefactors (Haas and Racing Point).
Williams stands alone as a publicly listed company reliant on prize money and its sponsorship portfolio.
The business model experienced turmoil in the last 12 months with the departure of title sponsor Martini and the substantial financial backing of drivers Lance Stroll and Sergey Sirotkin — all in a year that sudden changes to the technical regulations for 2019 required an unexpected additional outlay in developing the car.
Further, the smaller teams are increasingly closely tied with the larger ones. Haas is the most notable example, buying as many parts from Ferrari as is allowed by the regulations and outsourcing most of the rest to a third party. Toro Rosso too is re-establishing a technical partnership with Red Bull Racing now that the two share a power unit supplier.
Williams, on the other hand, remains steadfastly solitary, turning its nose up at the trend towards technical partnerships that it believes dilute the sport.
“It’s not easy currently with the way the regulations are for truly independent constructors to compete,” Claire Williams said at the launch of this year’s car, as per Autosport. “We’re incredibly proud of the fact we’re true constructors in the sense we make all of our race cars in-house ourselves.”
In many respects Williams is at the heart of a debate raging at the centre of the sport. The degree to which cars are built exclusively in-house intersects with cost-saving, both of which are matters being pursued by Formula One and the FIA for rules changes in 2021.
There is talk of an overall cost cap in 2021, but concrete details remain elusive. There is also the suggestion that the way the sport dictates how much of a car must be made in-house will be redefined, perhaps by forcing teams to make more parts independently in exchange for a list of mandated standard parts which all constructors would have to use — indeed the FIA this week has released a tender for a sole supplier of gearbox internals for 2021-24.
Formula 1 is attempting to move towards a more competitive and financially sustainable business model on these and other terms, but a happy medium on its most difficult issues is at least two years away, and could yet be delayed further.
Until then Williams will be forced to live its independent half-life struggling to keep up with its rivals on what has become an uneven playing field. That sounds like a crisis to me.
woodart
Guest
of course they can both exist. coexist? probably not. the tech race is over. f electric has won that. f1 needs to concetrate on the racing. but indycar is winning that one. f1 is in a halfway house ,neither one thing or the other. as I said, it needs to act NOW, not in five years. if they quickly act an tell the big corporates that the series is NOT for sale, and drastically cut costs, stop sucking up to fiat, get serious about proper racing teams, and stop having to prostitute f1 to places you have never heard of and have no interest or history in motor racing. f1 may survive in the future. walking away from tracks that have a proud f1 history has been a farce. spectators know that, and you cant invent instant classics, despite what marketing knowalls claim. a procession in whoknowswhereistan between a ferrari team and a mercedes team with suckup satelite teams making up the grid...or a race at brands, monza, indy, nurburg between half a dozen teams all with a real chance of winning and actual on track passing....
Michael Lamonato
Expert
Again, I don't disagree that F1 needs to be less reliant on manufacturers. That said, if the sport were more financially sustainable — the hundreds of millions spent to win is a turn-off for most — and if it better sold its technology message, it could maintain its appeal even when faced with a growing Formula E. There is no reason to think they can't coexist.
woodart
Guest
win on sunday,sell on monday was coined by lee iacocca when he was big cheese at ford, at a time when the big three ruled nascar. as I said, nascar saw the danger 40 yrs ago of letting big corporate run there sport. f1 is very quickly being overtaken by f electric as the series of choice for big corporate to use as marketing platform. with the ability to host races in city centres that f1 will never see, f electric will kill off f1 drawcard to big corporate in the next ten yrs. it is best for f1 to be proactive NOW, not reactive when mercedes fiat and renault bean counters pull the f1 plug.
Michael Lamonato
Expert
Yes, customer engines and gearboxes have just about always been the case. I said "greater degree". Modern F1, for example, requires teams to own their chassis and aero. Manufacturers have always been part of Formula One. They've come and gone, sure — and I agree reliance on them is dangerous — but F1 remains a massive motorsport marketing platform. Mercedes is involved in F1 and Formula E for this reason. Win on Sunday, sell on Monday is not a new phrase.
woodart
Guest
disagree with your assertion that f1 is different. there was a long period when 80-90% of cars were powered by one engine(cosworth) and used one gearbox. that period is now looked back on as one of the great times in f1 history ,with many great races and many different cars winning. it was also a time before big corporate took over , and all teams were there because of the racing, not just to spruik there product. sorry to burst your bubble ,but f1 is not different. it is like any other racing series, whether thats sports cars, A1, F electric, world touring cars ,indycar, etc. they all have good times and bad times. and in the modern world, all have to sell there integrity in some ways to survive. the trick is to keep firm control of there own destiny ,and not become a plaything of outside forces, something that f1 has allowed.
Michael Lamonato
Expert
It's a good call that F1 needs to understand that the independent teams are the ones it needs to look after most to ensure its long-term existence because they're the ones that will stick around no matter what. Williams, for example, is principally an F1 team. But is the answer to that standardising more parts, like engines and chassis? I don't think so. F1 will likely always be defined by a greater degree of individuality than other open-wheel series, because that's what makes it different. There are of course some concessions to help smaller teams — the engine manufacturers are already bound to supply any team that isn't able to strike a deal on their own, and the cost of an engine supply has been reduced after an agreement between the teams and the FIA. More needs to be done to keep them viable, and FOM is working towards it, but they also want to keep the larger manufacturers happy because they undoubtedly add spectacle to the show. It's a difficult balancing act.
woodart
Guest
sole supplier of gearbox....sounds like the more f1 changes, the closer it gets to indycar. perhaps its time for f1 to tell the major auto manufacturers(didnt realise that mclaren was a major manufacturer)that they either supply engines to everybody,or nobody. and chassis suppliers the same. nascar realised 40 yrs ago, that it had to take control back from the auto companies. f1 has been very slow in coming to realise that big corporates DONT give a fig about racing, its all about pushing their product, whether its drinks or cars or booze. f1 should look up and realize that more auto makers are in f electric ,and that trend will only grow. better for f1 to be pro-active now and take control of their own destiny,rather than dither around and watch the big corporates continue to run the series, then run away when they have bled it dry.