F1 »

Horner: Rumours about Red Bull 2010 expenditure 'wildly out'

Red Bull Racing team principal Christian Horner insists that probe as it might, the Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA) will find nothing amiss with the reigning double F1 World Champions' financial accounts in 2010
Christian Horner has reiterated that Red Bull Racing did not transgress the spending limits laid down by the Resource Restriction Agreement (RRA) last year as some have claimed, dismissing the speculation as 'wildly out' and similarly playing down suggestions that F1 has another season of political squabbling in-store.

Prior to Christmas, former FIA President Max Mosley hinted that in 'asking for amnesty for non-compliance of the cost-reduction plan', the reigning double F1 World Champions might have flouted the RRA, a Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA) initiative that came into being in 2009 following the failure of the Englishman's controversial budget cap and as an alternative means of keeping escalating expenditure in-check by stipulating increasingly stringent limits on staffing levels, aerodynamic development and external spending.

Whilst FOTA has since vowed to closely examine all competitors' budgets for 2010 [see separate story – click here], RBR team principal Horner is adamant that with regard to the Milton Keynes-based squad's account, at least, nothing amiss will be found.

“It's similar to the front wing or active ride-height situation,” the 37-year-old told Crash.net, recalling to mind the constant accusations of 'cheating' levelled at the energy drinks-backed outfit by indignant rivals throughout F1 2010. “Based on the fact that no numbers have been submitted to anyone yet, it's difficult to understand how some people seem to know what we've spent or how we've spent it.

“At the end of the day, our guys take it as a veiled compliment. It was a tremendous season for Red Bull Racing last year and I know what we spent, and the rumours are wildly out compared to the actual numbers that will be disclosed to FOTA this month.”

With off-track political machinations already threatening to derail the attention from the on-track thrills n' spills in 2011 – and discussions about a new Concorde Agreement looming – Horner was quick to refute the notion that fans are set for another summer of discontent in the sport à la 2009, and also quick to defend what will be the longest schedule in F1 history this season at 20 grands prix.

“I don't think so,” he assured, when asked if there is a risk that the polemical infighting might overshadow the competitive action again. “There's obviously the need for another Concorde Agreement, but that's still a couple of years away. I think the majority of people's focus will be on the racing, which is the most important thing. Hopefully, it will be a year in which the focus is on the racing and not on the off-track activities.

“Twenty races is about the right length, I think. If you look back, not so many years ago technicians and engineers would go straight from races to tests, with testing pretty much every week during the summer. Now, there's a lot less travel than there used to be, which I think justifies a couple of extra races compared to, say, 2005. I think it's the right thing to do. India is going to be a great spectacle, and I think all the grands prix on the calendar deserve their place on it – that's what makes it a world championship.”
by Russell Atkins

Related Pictures

Click on relevant pic to enlarge
Max Mosley
Formula One`s team bosses meet ahead of a press conference in Geneva to discuss the future of the sport
FOTA logo
Friday Practice 1, Christian Horner (GBR), Red Bull Racing, Sporting Director
Saturday, Adrian Newey (GBR), Red Bull Racing , Technical Operations Director and Christian Horner (GBR), Red Bull Racing, Sporting Director
Christian Horner
Saturday, Christian Horner (GBR), Red Bull Racing, Sporting Director
Friday Practice 1, Christian Horner (GBR), Red Bull Racing, Sporting Director
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Lewis Hamilton (GBR) Mercedes AMG F1 W08
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Sebastian Vettel (GER) Scuderia Ferrari SF70H
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Atmosphere
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Williams motorhome
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Lewis Hamilton (GBR) Mercedes AMG F1 W08
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Pascal Wehrlein (GER) Sauber C36
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Kimi Raikkonen (FIN) Scuderia Ferrari SF70H
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Kimi Raikkonen (FIN) Scuderia Ferrari SF70H
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Daniel Ricciardo (AUS) Red Bull Racing RB13
28.07.2017 - Free Practice 2, Kimi Raikkonen (FIN) Scuderia Ferrari SF70H

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

Frank Wank - Unregistered

February 01, 2011 4:36 PM

"POLMICIAL INFIGHTING" HooRayyyy... something new for F1 in 2011, a variation on the word polemics. I have lived a long time and had never heard the word used any where except F1 comments(I had to look it up:) Please Please no more polemics comments in F1! The 2011 regulations should have stipulated a ban on the word, $100K fine for first offense is probably appropriate. p.s. "Polmicial" is NOT a word in the English language (at least according to my spell checker :) )

Alan D - Unregistered

February 01, 2011 5:09 PM

Frank: "Polmicial is NOT a word in the English language (at least according to my spell checker)" Contrary to poplar opinion, the English language is not defined by dictionaries or spell checkers. I think French might be a proscribed language, where the national dictionary defines what is and isn't a word, but in English the dictionary is merely a record of contemporary word usage. I'm presuming the article must have had a typo in it, that it originally read "polmicial" but has since been updated to read "polemical". I'm not sure if you are objecting to the word polmicial or polemical. Polemical is a perfectly good word and by no means restricted to F1 circles.

© 1999 - 2017 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.