2005 Lotus Elise Price $8,900 Perfect Condition! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lotus F1 team $186 million in debt

The Lotus F1 team has fallen on some hard times. Majority-owned by investment firm Genii Capital and having little to do with the British automaker with which it shares its name, the Enstone-based outfit has been widely reported to be in serious financial trouble. The extent of those difficulties were until now unknown, but a new report from Germany's Auto Motor und Sport reveals that the team is in the red to the tune of £114 million - equivalent to $186 million at today's conversion rates.
The lack in cashflow is widely believed to have been the impetus for Kimi Raikkonen's departure from the team in order to return to cash-rich Ferrari, and was one of the major factors in selecting Pastor Maldonado to replace him instead of a more proven and accomplished driver of Raikkonen's caliber. Maldonado brings with him major sponsorship funds from Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA. In speaking with the German publication, however, Lotus F1 chairman (and Genii co-founder) Gerald Lopez revealed that the lion's share of the team's debt - £80 million or $130 million - is with Genii Capital itself, a negative balance that isn't likely to affect the team's day to day. That leaves about $56 million which the team owes to outside parties, including Raikkonen, who has yet to receive the full pay he was contracted for.
The team has opted to sit out the first test session of the Formula One season at Jerez. Its 2014 chassis isn't ready and, given the relatively cold temperatures at this point in the year, the team wouldn't expect to learn much about tire performance and degradation. As far as the new engine goes, Lopez says that any knowledge gleaned by Red Bull, Toro Rosso and Caterham at the test session will ultimately be shared with Renault and through it back to Lotus as well. Lotus engineers helped develop the new KERS system with Renault regardless, so the team already has the energy-recovery data it needs. The team will instead prepare for the second test session in Bahrain, by which point it aims to have its new car ready to kick off the season. Lopez says that it has secured the funding to offset its costs for the season ahead, and that it is working to pay down its debt.

Lotus Esprit cancelled? [UPDATE]

Two years ago, we were gobsmacked when humble Lotus shocked the automotive world by wheeling out no fewer than five new models - admittedly in various stages of development - at the 2010 Paris Motor Show. The ambitious onslaught of new sheetmetal came at the behest of then-CEO Danny Bahar who aimed to broaden the British marque's appeal by dramatically expanding its portfolio. Bahar was later thrown out by new Malaysian owners DRB-Hicom in a management shakeup that seems to still be, well, shaking out. Bahar was deposed over accusations of financial wrongdoing and the controversial executive has fired back with a $10.6M lawsuit.
Against this chaotic background, a cornerstone of Lotus' revival plans hinged on the rebirth of its Esprit supercar (shown in 2010 concept form above). According to new reports, however, the Esprit has been cancelled, a victim of the company's uncertain finances and direction. Depending on which rumor you choose to believe, the two-seat coupe was slated to receive a house-built V8 and possibly turbocharging or hybrid power. That may all be moot now, however, as DRB-Hicom is reported to have scrapped Bahar's plans wholesale, a development that apparently includes killing off the mid-engined Esprit, too.
UPDATE: And this, friends, is why we have this story with a question mark and a Rumormill tag - Lotus is denying that the Esprit has been killed off.

European commission investigating F1 finances and anti-competitive accusations

The Kingdom of Formula One reminds us of renaissance Florence - ruled by a singular chieftan behind a mask of representative involvement, rife with spectacularly convoluted machinations, awash in innovations that help define our world and far-flung, vindictive misery. If we found out Bernie Ecclestone's real last name was de Medici, well, it would explain a lot. Now after a bit of back-and-forth, the European Commission (EC) has taken aim at the kingdom, investigating whether F1 is anti-competitive and if the FIA has abused its antitrust agreement. The reason for EC scrutiny is that a British member of the European Parliament who represents an area in southwest England, Anneliese Dodds, has fielded complaints from engineering companies in her constituency that recent moves in F1 have put them out of business. She wrote to the EC to question why the FIA now has a stake in F1 when it signed an agreement in 2001 to be solely a governing body and abdicate any stakeholding in the sport. She also questioned the F1 Strategy Group, a group of the six top teams in F1 that makes decisions about the direction of the sport; she says that the Strategy Group not only appears to be a case of the F1 shirking its rule-making duty, it has resulted in unfair treatment of the small teams that aren't in the group. Dodds has a bit of a point. In 2001, the FIA sold F1's commercial rights to Ecclestone for 100 years for a sum of $313.7 million. That was done to placate European regulators who insisted that "the role of FIA will be limited to that of a sports regulator, with no commercial conflicts of interest." Although the rights are ultimately owned by the FIA and bring in a $10M fee every year from Formula One, those rights bring in $1.6 billion each year to Formula One Management (FOM), the company that owns F1. When Ecclestone was trying to get the new Concorde Agreement signed in 2013 that governs the running of the sport, the FIA wouldn't sign, saying it wanted F1 to share a larger slice of its revenue – the FIA has been losing money for years, see. To the get the FIA to sign, Ecclestone sold it a one-percent stake in F1 for $460,000 and gave the FIA a $5M signing 'bonus;' whenever F1 has its IPO, that stake is estimated to be worth about $120 million - not a bad return. Yet, according to the aforementioned 2001 agreement, the FIA can't have that equity stake.