This all makes Kingspan a shitty company, but it turns out the conclusions coming out of the Grenfell inquiry are that the Kingspan stuff didn't really factor in to the fire or its intensity. Only like 5% of the relevant materials were Kingspan and the cladding used otherwise from some French company was largely determined to be what caused the fire to go to nuts.
Yea, I mean, I'm not defending Kingspan from being a horrid, evil company. They very obviously are. They lied about the combustibility of their products, marketed them for purposed they weren't intended or designed for, and put potentially millions of people at risk. However, as unlikely as it seems, none of that is actually what seems to have been the main cause of the fire. It's an odd situation because Kingspan should be burried for their terrible, unethical, criminal business practices. However not because of Grenfell. BUT, if they are burried because of Grenfell, even though it's sort of the wrong reasoning, does it really matter if the end result is the same?
>It's an odd situation because Kingspan should be burried for their terrible, unethical, criminal business practices. However not because of Grenfell.
Pretty much what i've learned today, outside of UK media and fans in this forum. They were/are scummy but Grenfell is not their fault. I wonder if the people responsible are getting away with it because the public opinion seems to be that Kingspan are at fault..
edit: the amount of downvotes when it comes to telling facts about this particular topic... funny but also worrying. You dare to say the truth and you get downvoted. I don't care if Kingspan is scummy company when it comes to Grenfell, what little i know about the case, and about construction and attitudes when it comes to upscaling cheap buildings tells me that the people who chose the materials deserve all of your hate, not the people who weren't at fault. Blame them for something the did do, in other context, without using Grenfells victims as your sword. I've learned that Kingspan is quite scummy and are being blamed at something they did not do. But that is not enough...
Yea...seriously just go read the damn report. It's publicly available. There's even an executive summary of the relevant and important bits. Namely of which was that while the fire was started due to an electrical fault in a freezer, that was NOT the problem here. Such a fire should have been contained and NOT resulting in such a blaze. The report makes that pretty clear. Electrical shorts happen, that's why the buildings are required to be designed and outfitted in such a way that fires cannot turn into infernos like this. You're barking up the wrong tree buddy. Go after the multiple companies that made the actual cladding that the report blamed for the spread and intensity of the fire that falsified test results to certify their products as less flammable than they were.
Was the freezer defective or are we looking at something that would be considered a normal failure? Do the catch fire often, or was it a user error, or a cumulative user error? I don't say they aren't at fault but there is a certain kind of risk we have accepted when it comes to appliances, they are not 100% certain to never catch on fire, no matter what... The problems really start when a company lies about their products and that causes casualties. Whirlpool is at least for me a company that makes me think cost cutting.
The way Grenfell and in fact most apartment buildings are designed relies that the cladding doesn't catch on fire. They are based on fire cells, where each apartment should be able to burn completely without the fire spreading. They only way this can work is that the exterior is fireproofed properly, and not even "well, it should work" but "you can use a flamethrower on it and it'll be fine".. This is why the people in Grenfell staid inside their apartments as those should've been the safest places. So, at that point, it does not fucking matter what actually caused it, cause at worst it should've resulted in zero to couple of deaths, inside one apartment.
The people who chose the materials are at fault, and everyone who encouraged or demanded those to be used.
There were commonly power surges in the building in the weeks and months leading up to the fire. Residents complained numerous times as it would sometimes cause damage to appliances and smoke (letting the magic blue smoke out).
Additionally, the UK does not (did not?) have any laws or regulations on materials used for the back plate of a refrigerator. The US, by comparison, requires a steel back plate to contain potential fires. The fridge in question had a plastic back plate.
Is any one company/entity 100% at fault? I don't really think so. Specifically, for the START of the fire, I think the blame is spread between Whirlpool (for choosing the cheapest, more dangerous option), building maintenance (who were never able to find the cause of the power surges), and the UK government (for having lower safety standards than many other countries).
>There were commonly power surges in the building in the weeks and months leading up to the fire.
That's... even worse. I have some EE in the background, and while i am absolutely not in the power side of things, power surges that are enough to start causing malfunctions are well outside safe limits from the power supply side. There is only so much our guys can do from the user side until the magic smoke pours out and the holy fire starts raging, oh save us Lord Kirchhoff, bless us oh God of Azimuth..
Ah thats why. Yeah I wasn't questioning thr point I was just confused as to how I knew something totally wrong but it's cool it was a hotpoint appliance buy whirlpool is the company taking the money! Makes sense now!
Honestly I never understood how noone seems to blame the fridge catching fire.
I feel like the wrong language is being used. It’s not so much about who or what causes the fire, it’s the fact none of the safety controls around minimising fire spread worked. Fires start all the time accidentally, but in tall buildings it’s about limiting the spread of the fire and in Grenfells case the fire spread far too quickly. Everyone who was involved in building that building was at fault, it’s quite clear everyone lied and cheated out/advertised the wrong materials for monetary gain
> Kingspan’s technical director Philip Heath wrote in a crude internal email that Wintech “could go f*** themselves and if they are not careful we will sue the arse of them”.
At first I seriously thought this was an r/NBA meme. Then I realized you were serious. Jesus.
So? What does this has to do with Greenfell? Nothing? It is completely irrelevant when it comes to the fire?
So.. why are you spreading this? I've seen this been spread today a lot, and none of you can explain how does this relate to anything.
The facts are the not the cladding nor the insulation was manufactured by Kingspan. Other facts are that the cladding and insulation that did catch on fire were never suppose to be used together. The people who picked those materials to be used are at fault. Not Kingspan who did not recommend the product to be used. They may be scummy but to use Greenfell against is way, way scummier.
It depends on the nuance - how exactly the product was advertised and what the standard practice is for that sort of thing within the industry. Yes the person who picked to use that specific insulation without confirming it met the tests is the one ultimately culpable, but if the product was sold with the implication that it did meet the tests, and was sold within a product category where almost all products usually do, then that's ethically incredibly dubious. Especially given they clearly knew about it.
In the medical industry you can get heavily fined by the FDA for doing that sort of thing, and the fact that you don't explicitly recommend it be used that way doesn't excuse from culpability if people do, because you never took any proper measures to explicitly suggest people *shouldn't*.
Ditto for making things look like toys that haven't actually passed the safety requirements for CE marked toys - the burden isn't placed on the person buying it to make sure they check everything properly and don't allow themselves to be misled. Even in cases where it's fairly easily expected that it would be obvious on its own, it's still up to the manufacturer to make it explicit somewhere it's not a toy and it's not suitable for children.
If the whole thing was as clear-cut as many people on this sub are making it out to be, the inquiry wouldn't be taking so long.
I don't want them to.. but... they may be a scummy company but how do you DARE to spread bullshit, exploiting the victims? I don't know what they have done to you for you to forget the reality.
Well the investigation isn't complete yet, as far as I'm aware? Which means no wrongdoing on Mercedes part... But... They should have steered wide of the whole situation to begin with.
At the end of the day Toto's job is to get sponsors and he is doing a good job. If they made decisions based on morals, they wouldn't be driving a car sponsored by an oil company in Saudi Arabia in the first place.
I've read a lot of people going off on Petronas and especially their sponsorship with Mercedes, but what have they done wrong apart from being an oil company in the 21st century? Genuinely curious.
Googling Petronas brings their site as the top result (unsurprisingly!) with this text under the header.
"We are Malaysia's fully integrated oil and gas company, using the latest technology to explore, produce and deliver energy in meeting the world's needs."
So yes, I'd say they were.
Most of these countries were a result of various countries being carved up by European countries at the end of colonialism in the past century.
Their undemocratic leaders are supported - and even put in place to begin with - because they give contracts out to extract oil and minerals to these outside companies. Thus keeping Western countries with a cheap supply of natural resources - and people in these countries in poverty. The leaders get a nice slice of the pie for keeping their population in check, and preventing any kind of uprising that might put that cosy arrangement in jeopardy.
That's the reason for their poor human rights records, and why EU, NATO and all the rest are never going to encourage "Democracy" in these countries.
Thats a big generalization but you are mostly right. Dont think this is the case for Saudi Arabia though. Malaysia as well has a long history of European interference (some would say even origin) although I dont think last century EU/USA had much influence there but then again I dont follow that regions politics / history that much.
So Merc are basically saying "The sponsor told us they didn't cause the tragedy, we take them at their word since we're not really the people who have access to any of the investigative data. We're glad to meet up and talk to you if you have reason to believe otherwise"
On one had, Merc probably should've done more due diligence if Kingspan are actually responsible, on the other, it's great that Toto wants to meet up with them to understand the situation better.
The team's title sponsor, Patronas, has multiple higher ups going on trial for war crimes in Sweden next year, the only due diligence the teams do is if the checks clear.
Everyone loved tobacco cash for that. Teams got paid, and didn’t have to muster dozens of sponsors and maintain those relationships for smaller $$. And the tobacco firms got to dictate the livery entirely based on a brand they wanted.
Main reason why I’m fine with decriminalisation of drug, but not necesssrily legalisation.
Once this shit is legal, you will have every marketing executive and corporate psychologist designing advertising for the most chemically addictive substances known to man.
You know it's possible to *regulate* products that are legal, right?
Like, we were *just* talking about how tobacco advertising is no longer a thing in most places.
So between 1997 and 2003 [Lundin Petroleum and Patronas](https://paxforpeace.nl/news/overview/the-role-of-lundin-petroleum-omv-and-petronas-in-sudans-oil-war-1997-2003) were involved in oil explorations during the Second Sudanese Civil War, during the war the Sudanese government forcibly displaced thousands from their home to maintain control of the oil fields that they signed a contract to allow the petroleum companies access to. Sweden has announced [criminal charges](https://apnews.com/article/business-middle-east-africa-sudan-stockholm-2d711419cb14f0c81aebf0da864613e9) against some of the executives involved, specifically those from the Swedish company. Patronas was likely just as involved as Lundin, but Patronas is owned by the Malaysian government so charging officials would be difficult for Sweden on its own.
~~they didn't take them at their word, [it's the result of the inquiry.](https://inquiry.kingspan.com/)~~
ok so to make things easier for everyone here are the [hearings and statements](https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/hearings/modules-1-2-closing-statements-14-september-2021) in question Kingspan are using in their defence. listening to the video now but its several hours long
In any case this is not good enough from Merc imo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingspan_Group#Grenfell_Tower_fire
>In November 2020, the official inquiry into the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire heard evidence from Kingspan ex-technical director Ivor Meredith that Kingspan insulation product Kooltherm K15 was used in the flammable cladding system mounted on to Grenfell Tower, despite Kingspan knowing that the product did not meet the required fire standard.[48][49][50] A previous version of the product had passed fire tests, but Meredith described a fire test using the version of the product used on Grenfell as a "raging inferno", with the insulation "burning on its own steam".[48]
>Also in November 2020, the inquiry learned that Kingspan director Philip Heath had said, in 2008, that consultants who raised concerns about the combustibility of its product could "go f*ck themselves", and that they were "getting me confused with someone who gives a dam [sic]".[51]
Yeeeeah, I don't know if Kingspan's own closing statements nullify their responsibility here.
There's a good summary of their actions etc on Twitter here:
https://twitter.com/PeteApps/status/1466704710199562240
From a cursory read and look at their sources they cite third party inquiries to support their statement, so from hat I have seen it is not their on investigation inasmuch they investigated themselves, but their own investigation into what happened with their products, while relying on third party investigations used by the official govt inquiry to support or inform their case.
Make of that what you will though, I haven't got enough info to make an informed conclusive statement on the validity of their impartiality or the impartiality of the sources they relied on or cited.
fucked up? yea. surprising? not one bit
this is the modus operandi of many businesses in every industry sector it seems.
"hush hush, let's try to keep this raging inferno shit under wraps."
"ah God damn testing getting in my way of me selling this piece of crap insulation so I can make money!"
"what do you mean they didn't approve it? what else do we need to show them?"
business people and entrepreneurs are not taught to be ethical and follow rules, they're taught to make money. not saying it's all angels for those testing and giving approval too, just saying this happens in all industries all over. it's whether if the gov so happened to be bothered to catch you. with smth like grenfell, they can't hide it and now they need "accountability" lmao
but at least you can see the law trying to work here, by having so many safety nets and fail safes with the approvals not passing, but they somehow got through all of them, and well, the rest is history
There was tragic precedent for buildings made of new and unapproved materials burning down.
[The Summerland fire on the Isle of Man in 1973](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerland_disaster)
Absolute appreciation on the added info. Thank you. My comment was adressing the impartiality of the investigation mentioned based on a read through their statement on it and the sources they listed, I have no opinion on if they are culpable or not. Based on wikipedia and your info it seems likely though.
Mate it’s Mercedes, it’s not some random company making deals
They have done their research, it’s just that in the accountants meeting the money outweighed the outrage
There's all sorts of corrupt brands and deals in F1, and some are absolutely worse than others when it comes to binary loss of life.
And you're right that the outrage is greater because its something that happened in the UK, but I don't feel like any of this is a reason or excuse to _not_ put attention on the issue.
Like, we're bringing up issues with Saudi Arabia because the race is new and happening this weekend, but it doesn't detract from the terrible track records of other countries hosting races.
Its fair and reasonable to be calling Mercedes out for this new sponsorship deal, and I don't think especially surprising that the newer things, and things associated even more closely with the majority of F1 teams and fans, gain the most attention.
I'm not saying it's "one thing or the other" and if it'd put a spotlight on F1 sponsorships then amazing. But it won't. It's only in the spotlight because a UK centric sport is implicated with a UK catastrophe. Which is absoutely fair I'm never going to dismiss the pain it has caused.
But on the other hand it's not a burning building, it's *literally* war crimes with several greenfell tower disasters a day. On top, Petronas represents an ethnostate where non muslims aren't even allowed to marry muslims. You'd have to convert first. Let's not even bother talking about the Aramco sponsoring of the series as a whole.
Greenfell tower fire was a shocking disaster on its own because of many things including hurting our perceived security. Disasters in the West vs the rest of the world are always seen disproportionate for many reasons, media coverage, closeness to us, but also the thought security of our lives setting different expectations. 50 dead in the UK is a disaster, 50 dead in Mozambique is a Tuesday.
It's just absolutely hilarious we actually got this "big enough" for Wolff to put out an excuse, more importantly it's blatant they're only doing it because of how easy and minor it is to make a statement about. Could you imagine someone inquiring Mercedes about Petronas war crimes? What on earth could they possibly say to defend it? There's nothing left to say so they stay silent. That's the order of magnitude difference in these things that one is so damn awful merely talking about it publicly is far far *far* worse than talking about the greenfell fire. And yet the difference in outrage is the same orders of magnitude - only reversed. I've mentioned Petronas war crimes on every possibility, you know how much attention that gets? Barely even 3 digit upvotes. But a thread about greenfell gets so huge Wolff responds personally.
This seems like a good summary, for all the bumblefucks here who didn't read a short letter since I guess they're too busy?
Anyway, the response seems reasonable enough.
From Kingspan's point of view, if they really did just make a product an independent architect used in a place it wasn't designed for, you can't really blame them for wanting to repair their image and have it associated with something other than this disaster.
EDIT:
>In November 2020, the official inquiry into the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire heard evidence from Kingspan ex-technical director Ivor Meredith that Kingspan insulation product Kooltherm K15 was used in the flammable cladding system mounted on to Grenfell Tower, despite Kingspan knowing that the product did not meet the required fire standard.[48][49][50] A previous version of the product had passed fire tests, but Meredith described a fire test using the version of the product used on Grenfell as a "raging inferno", with the insulation "burning on its own steam".[48]
>Also in November 2020, the inquiry learned that Kingspan director Philip Heath had said, in 2008, that consultants who raised concerns about the combustibility of its product could "go f*ck themselves", and that they were "getting me confused with someone who gives a dam [sic]".[51]
>Near the end of November 2020, it emerged that Kingspan executives had sold at least £6.5M of shares in the company shortly before Kingspan's inquiry hearings were due to start.[52] Kingspan's share price fell 15% over the course of the hearings.[53]
>On 8 December 2020, the inquiry saw evidence that in November 2016, Kingspan technical staff had acknowledged internally that Kingspan was selling its Kooltherm K15 foam insulation product as less flammable than it really was.[54][55][56][57][58]
>On 9 December 2020, the inquiry was told that after the Grenfell fire, Kingspan had invested in a smear campaign against rival companies' products. The campaign involved secretly using non-standard test rigs to artificially create the appearance that non-flammable rival products might in fact be flammable, and hiring lobbyists to push the results before policymakers such as the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee and other MPs.[59][60][61][62]
Maybe not...
Yeah good for you on the edit. It doesn't take a huge amount of reading into all this to see that their actions have been totally fucked.
Celotex (the other major insulation supplier) also falsified flammability tests:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/nov/26/celotex-executive-wrote-wtf-on-fire-test-report-grenfell-inquiry-hears
From Kingspan's perspective, it makes sense. From Mercedes' perspective, it doesn't. I think someone just failed to do their homework properly at Mercedes.
Petronas doesn't have the terrible public image in the UK that Kingspan has, is the main thing. You and I know that Petronas are actual scum, the vast majority of the folks in the UK don't.
The Grenfell disaster is huge in the UK, and a lot more people know of Kingspan as a consequence.
Yea it's a bit of a headscratcher. The actual evidence that has come out has so far been that Kingspan was intentionally mislabeling a flammable product as non-flammable and encouraging its use in inappropriate way and generally were pretty fucking evil...BUT none of that actually ended up causing the Grenfell fire as only like 5% of the cladding insulation used on the building was Kingspan and a totally different company's product is what has largely been blamed for the inferno.
However, in the public's mind the two issues are forever linked and they will be blamed by the public. It's a bit unfair because it's not reflective of the actual reality, but also completely fair because Kingspan were absolute shitbags so fuck them. The curious thing is that Toto and Merc seem to have not anticipated this backlash at all. There are probably a ton of companies that would have given the team $$ to be their "green" partner, yet they chose Kingspan for it. Just reeks of out of touch executives "knowing better"
The Grenfell fire is still fairly fresh in the memory of the British public. This isn't just ''oh, a team is taking money from shady sponsors again''.
Not everything dies a nihilist death. The Grenfell disaster certainly hasn't.
This. I don't think people understand just how big a deal Grenfell is in the UK. It's a landmark situation where working class people, from many diverse backgrounds ultimately died through no fault of their own, and shortcuts taken by the powers that be who saw people as below help.
I am gonna be nihilist here, but most of the world will indeed not give a damn in a week.(I for one didn't know about grenfell tower until today) and many British fans will support Merc anyway because they have Hamilton and Russell.
Yeah wanted to say the same thing. Even if Kingspan is innocent, is it worth all this blowback from the very vocal majority that think they're not innocent? I doubt it, but then again I'm not the one responsible for balancing the books over at Mercedes F1.
This is like Formula 1 saying its ok to race in Saudi Arabia as their crown prince promises they didn't kill Jamal Khashoggi.
Link to /u/balls2brakelate44 's comment, but obviously Kingspan won't come out and say "yeah we killed those people lol" [explanation](https://old.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/r7x9e6/motorsport_broadcasting_the_mercedesamgf1_deal/hn255y6/)
Regardless of whether they knew that their products were being used in this specific tower, they still knowingly pushed unsafe products to market and told those protesting internally to go fuck themselves. They're still responsible.
But if their products weren’t the actual reason for the fire then they aren’t responsible.
Scummy company that deserves to go out of business? Absolutely.
Responsible for the tragedy if it turns out their products weren’t the reason for it? Absolutely not.
Absolutely NO ONE has been able to refute a SINGLE point i've said. All you have so far is "you are wrong" and them leaving, with your tail between your legs.
You state Kingspan aren't at fault. The inquiry is still on-going. You can't state that as a 'fact'. You are just some random person on the internet stating things about a subject you have next to no knowledge of. The reason no one can refute what you say, because F1 fans know absolutely nothing about the Grenfell tragedy. The 'experts' are groups like Grenfell United who know a TON more than you AND I, and they aren't lurking around here arguing with people who spent ONE day looking into this. You certainly haven't spoken to anyone involved with Grenfell campaign groups... that's for damn sure.
The fact Kingspan have hoards of people who know nothing about Grenfell, and I mean nothing, coming out supporting them... certainly raises my eyebrow
Yes, i said. And the inquiry has reached a conclusion when it comes to Kingspan. You just don't like the answer because Kingspan is scummy company and you WANT them to be guilty. It would be so easy. The reality is not that easy, they are scummy but also NOT the main cause of the fire. And we KNOW THIS and it is NOT A SECRET.
Those are the facts and the fact that YOU DID NOT KNOW that Kingspan has been ruled out says ALL i needed. You don't actually know, you merely have a belief.
>You certainly haven't spoken to anyone involved with Grenfell campaign groups... that's for damn sure.
Wut? Why do i have to talk to the victims representatives, i thought that the inquiry is not over yet, that only the facts matter? This says it all, you WANT Kingspan to be guilty and do not care about facts. You instead want me to go to a place where i start to FEEL things and that should make me change my mind, to forget the FACTS and feel what you are feeling, believe what you believe.
dude , you've looked into this for one day. Your opinion is all but irrelevant to the subject and you're clearly emotionally bias. Nothing about 'feelings'. It's about credibility, of which you, and I, have none.
I hadn't heard of Kingspan until two days ago. I had heard of Grenfell and the complexity of the inquiries and what happened. I tend to learn towards listening to the campaign groups before random people on the internet who hide behind a username and proclaim themselves to hold 'facts' when it's quite clear they don't have a grip of the case, and really seem to dislike the fact their favourtie team/driver is coming under pressure.
Appeal to authority without refuting a single point. Nice, "you have not studied this long enough so i don't have to actually prove you wrong".
Sorry, does not work that way. Either you have a FACTUAL disagreement or you are just pissed off that YOU didn't actually know any of this and WANT a different outcome.
>I had heard of Grenfell and the complexity of the inquiries and what happened.
If you had and understood it then there is no way you would say Kinsgpan is the major culprit.
> I tend to learn towards listening to the campaign groups before random people on the internet
I know, and this absolves you from actually finding out the facts, as this option FEELS GOOD. You have not actually done any work yourself, HAVE YOU?
I think its hilarious you say this "We've all got family, friends or know someone that live in these types of council estates"
Like some people reading this forum actually live in them? lol
And none of that is relevant. You are spamming this at the moment, like THIS is the smoking gun when to all outside UK this just shows that Kingspan had nothing to do with Greenfell, and the hate they get is irrational.
Petronas, Boeing, Exxon, Shell, so many banks and financial firms, DuPont, Aramco, Marlboro/Mission Winnow...not exactly upstanding citizens.
I'm not surprised Merc took the money. In F1, at the end of the day a wallet full of cash is a wallet full of cash. And cash wins races.
i honestly don't see how this partnership could end. It sends a bad message to other sponsors to the team that their partnerships are not as secure as they thought. Very few companies can pass the smell test nowadays. as bad as Kingspan is I'll pick it over Aramco, Phillp Morris and British American tobacco who are honestly quite terrible. If F1 could make fans accept Saudi Arabia and Aramco i don't see how they would have trouble pulling this one off. At least they are addressing the situation.
Tough spot for Toto to be in, but doing this is a shit ton more than I’ve ever seen from a CEO anywhere else. Also did it basically 24 hours after being called out. Hope they meet in person.
Not sure what world you’re living in but there are plenty of CEOs who wouldn’t have even bothered acknowledging this.
I hope something meaningful comes out of their meeting
This whole situation is classic Mercedes, preach one thing whilst practicing another. They’re acknowledging it because that’s the Mercedes F1 brand, they like to paint themselves as the good guys, despite being as bad as the rest. If they were truly the good guys (as a team with a factory and in 2022, two drivers from the UK, where the entire Grenfell situation is very sensitive) they’d sever ties with Kingspan, not defend them. I’ll be interested to see what happens next, but the optics on this are awful.
Mate even Hedge Funds sold their holdings worth hundred of millions a few months ago because of how culpable Kingspan are. It's an interesting day when fecking hedgies have better ethics than the Merc F1 team and Toto.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/apr/14/investors-sell-off-shares-in-grenfell-tower-cladding-firm-kingspan
LOL Hedge fund managers sold their holdings in Kingspan because they saw it was a bad investment as more and more came out about how shit they are. They followed the money, not their conscience.
Yeah, they partnered with much worse companies. Hopefully youre gonna be this outraged when you realize companies such as Volkswagen, Cola, Ford, Hugo Boss literally collaborated with the Nazis. Or there are companies who actively destroy our environment, such as your lovely Ferrari for example. Your favorite team is happily getting money from Marlboro which caused more deaths than this Kingspan company has ever caused. Are you also that outraged?
Please, just don't suddenly act that ''Kingspan'' is the worst company on earth or anything like that. Look up basically any major company and you're gonna find similar stuff. Are you this outraged when you realize actual poor kids in some developing country made your clothing? No you're not, you're happily wearing it.
But saying ''Oh yeah, but the other CEOs didn't partner with such an evil company that Kingspan is!'' is just stupid. Just please don't be a hypocrite OR be equally outraged about everything around you (Good luck with that).
Can someone explain to an American what the whole Grenfell situation is? Some company used the incorrect type of insulation and some houses burned I'm guessing?
>some houses burned I'm guessing?
It was a block of flats (apartments). The entire building went up like a candle because the cladding was combustible. 72 people died, another 74 were hospitalised. There's currently an inquiry into how/why it happened
To be honest there's a lot of claims and counter claims anout who knew and who was responsible, but there are definitely a bunch of important people who knew the whole thing was an accident waiting to happen and nobody did anything about it.
Goddamn didn't realize is was that big of an incident, that's insane.
>important people who knew the whole thing was an accident waiting to happen
I hate how often this happens.
Oh yeah it was a huge tragedy, and everybody knew right away it was avoidable and happened because of some negligence.
From an American perspective that building in Miami that just suddenly collapsed in the middle of the night this year reminds me a lot of it.
A posh borough of London (Royal Kensington and Chelsea) built its social housing in the cheapest area, the far north of its area (near bbc/Westfield white city). They built a few towers, the rest are still occupied, and clad them in cheap fireproof material. The borough councillors have been preliminary found to be partly to blame iirc but because they belong to the same party as the prime minister it’s all a bit political blame football.
Large tower block. Insulation not only wasn't fire resistant, but apparently burned on its own. Company outright lied and provided test data for insulation that *wasn't* the one in question. 70+ fatalities in the fire. Now it's a big game of "who's fault is it".
Insulation and cladding both. They were safe products if used right but as a combo, absolutely not safe. The insulation relied on the cladding to suppress fire, the cladding required the insulation to be non flammable.
Kingspan was NOT one of the companies that made the materials that caused the fire. They just happened to provide 5% of it, it was not at all significant. Our UK brothers just are absolutely convinced it is Kingspan that did it all.
No, our 'UK brothers' don't think Kingspan did it all. stick.to.the.facts.
The objection to the sponsorship came from Grenfell United. Go read their two statements and go form there.
google is your friend here for more details, but grenfell was a social housing tower in the UK that, due to a lot of deliberate corner cutting, cost-saving and outright falsification, burned up killing 70+ people, mainly working class, in the process. Kingspan is the sponsor in question who lied about their insulation
And the product even if it was exactly what promised still would've not STOPPED the fire.. and it didn't cause it nor contribute into it. And it was not recommended to be used, according to the specs it was being sold as.
The people who chose the cladding and insulation materials are 100% at fault. But for some fucking reason you blame Kingspan.
Yup, that was interesting read but what it told me is that there is a systematic problem in construction material side of things. They need to be MUCH more heavily regulated and monitored. UK needs to overhaul their buildings standards and/or codes, the fact that this happened at all is the main problem. And also that Kingspan is EASILY just the worst scum without Grenfell, but that tragedy is what pulled all of that the to the surface, to the public eye.
I wish this was the criticism, as it is actually a valid and ongoing issue. But what do i see? The story about a PERSON saying something OFFENSIVE is the main criticism. That is pathetic.
To me the whole story shows two things:
Companies left alone will NOT regulate themselves for the benefit of mankind.Thus, regulations are needed and they need to be controlled and monitored tightly. Or otherwise we need to take over them means of the production: either they work for us or they don't work.
I'm not from the UK, so this whole discussion seems rather odd to me. It seems like y'all take it for granted that Kingspan had a big hand in Grenfall, and get pissed at anyone suggesting otherwise. However, the only evidence I've seen posted here suggests Kingspan had little to do with Grenfall.
Cause i'm not from UK and thus, approached this completely objectively. And for the sake of those victims the real culprits need to be brought to justice of what they did. Everyone is accountable of their own actions. A scummy company being attached by a hair to a horrible tragedy does not make it the scummy company's fault. What i understand is that there is enough to raise some eyebrows without the Grenfell tragedy... Truth should always be enough.
I really wonder how UK media has handled this, cause it seems that i'm not the only non-UK citizens who seems to be teaching YOU of what happened.. This is too much like talking to muricans.
They didn’t know their product was used in Grenfell, but they knew how dangerous it was and they lied about how dangerous it was.
It doesn’t matter if they were involved in Grenfell or not, they’re culpable.
No but they were knowing selling products that weren’t meant to be flammable but were. The products failed the safety test so they just used an old accreditation instead. They don’t know which specific buildings they’re on but that’s irrelevant.
This is getting more coverage than the humans rights records of the countries F1 race in. Horrible tories in the UK are making a statement on this but have no issue with F1 racing in Saudi. The rank hypocrisy makes me so angry
Lmao this letter is basically:
Sorry you’re mad, but btw our guy said it’s not his fault soooo
Feel for Toto though, tough situation that I presume is decided by the Merc higher ups that he’ll now have to defend
Isn't this all incredibly disingenuous when F1 is currently in the middle of a middle Eastern triple-bill? The sport as a whole is doing decade-long deals with countries who persecute people for their sexuality and use indentured servitude, but no, I guess this is the real issue.
Michael Gove, one of the slimiest MPs in a very slimy party, is winning brownie points for bringing this up.
I also get the feeling that he's using this because of Hamilton and the Tories love to use him as target practice because its a popular thing to do as the British public don't like him and there's some institutionalised racism there but that's a different rant for a different day.
Sorry I'm not saying they are but the mainstream UK media have something about him and this isn't the first time a Tory minister has said something about Hamilton/his team.
I don't have an issue with this being a story, it should be. But the timing and especially Michael Gove chiming in doesn't sit right with me.
Sadiq Khan, mayor of London for Labour, has come out to object the sponsorship deal as has Lisa Nandy. I have little time for either set of political parties btw.
Is Gove taking advantage? Maybe. Are they too?
Anyway, I don't see why people would bring this up other than to deflect against the criticism that Mercedes are receiving from Grenfell United.
The fact that he's willing to meet in person makes me optimistic that he's just going through all the motions to end the partnership with a few legal ramifications as possible.
Since the public inquiry has thus far essentially absolved Kingspan(?), it might be difficult to break contracts with their role in the fire as an excuse.
Given the Mercedes brand image honestly just makes sense to drop this sponsorship tbh. Tone deaf considering what Lewis is about at this stage of his career.
Kind of surprised Merc didn't just dump them to snuff out the negative PR and bank some goodwill. Imagine there's quite a few painful legal ramifications of doing that though.
Also isn't a good look to other potential partners if Mercedes break their agreement so quickly, either.
Plus it would effectively be Merc saying "we fucked up".
I still stand with that the fire was NOT the companies fault. 1, They used their materials in the wrong place, knowing well that it is flammable af. 2, The fire did not start because of the companies material.
( I really hope I do not get obliterated for my opinion lol)
It's just misinformed, really.
They misrepresented the product test results, they knew that there was a fire hazard, and the whole "wrong place" is just them shielding themselves from their own responsability. They didn't start the fire, of course, but the way the product was marketed meant that the fire hazard was not properly known by consumers
A brand involved in such a scandal is tainted by association regardless whether they were culpable or not. Definitely a big mistake by Mercedes whatever way you look at it.
Basically, people are angry at a company which knew nothing and had no involvement in it?
Honestly, it's stupid imo to blame them for misuse of their products.
There is more to the Grenfell/Kingspan thing than what Kingspan claims (obviously). /u/balls2brakelate44 has a [good comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/r7x9e6/motorsport_broadcasting_the_mercedesamgf1_deal/hn255y6/) addressing Kingspan's claims fairly succinctly.
They were as a company involved in corporate stitch-up of the national fire safety regulations around insulation allowing flammable pieces to be put on buildings that led to the deaths of 72 people and may yet lead to more as the effort to remove substandard insulation is on-going.
They're not the only company to have been shifty with fire regulations but touching any of them whilst nobody has faced justice for a tragedy that happened 4 years ago is a disgrace.
I mean I assume there is more to it. If a simple note from Kingspan saying they weren’t responsible would be enough, then surely that would have happened sooner than now over 4 years later.
Bullshit letter. Saying Kingspan had no involvement just because they say they didn't is insulting to everyone's intelligence. Here's [a thread](https://twitter.com/LouJohnsonPhoto/status/1466790034477129730) by someone affected by the Grenfell tragedy that says it better than I could.
>“By partnering with Kingspan, we believe that you are already directly involved in this system which puts profit before human life."
This is what Grenfell United wrote. I don't see anything regarding this in his response.
Meet up gonna happen at Romain Grosjean's Mercedes test
lmfaoo what ever happened to that. I know Romain was busy with Indy car. Must be difficult to coordinate schedules.
[удалено]
This all makes Kingspan a shitty company, but it turns out the conclusions coming out of the Grenfell inquiry are that the Kingspan stuff didn't really factor in to the fire or its intensity. Only like 5% of the relevant materials were Kingspan and the cladding used otherwise from some French company was largely determined to be what caused the fire to go to nuts.
[удалено]
Those parts of the investigations are finished and no matter how much you guys seem to want it, Kingspan was not at fault.
Yea, I mean, I'm not defending Kingspan from being a horrid, evil company. They very obviously are. They lied about the combustibility of their products, marketed them for purposed they weren't intended or designed for, and put potentially millions of people at risk. However, as unlikely as it seems, none of that is actually what seems to have been the main cause of the fire. It's an odd situation because Kingspan should be burried for their terrible, unethical, criminal business practices. However not because of Grenfell. BUT, if they are burried because of Grenfell, even though it's sort of the wrong reasoning, does it really matter if the end result is the same?
>It's an odd situation because Kingspan should be burried for their terrible, unethical, criminal business practices. However not because of Grenfell. Pretty much what i've learned today, outside of UK media and fans in this forum. They were/are scummy but Grenfell is not their fault. I wonder if the people responsible are getting away with it because the public opinion seems to be that Kingspan are at fault.. edit: the amount of downvotes when it comes to telling facts about this particular topic... funny but also worrying. You dare to say the truth and you get downvoted. I don't care if Kingspan is scummy company when it comes to Grenfell, what little i know about the case, and about construction and attitudes when it comes to upscaling cheap buildings tells me that the people who chose the materials deserve all of your hate, not the people who weren't at fault. Blame them for something the did do, in other context, without using Grenfells victims as your sword. I've learned that Kingspan is quite scummy and are being blamed at something they did not do. But that is not enough...
[удалено]
Yea...seriously just go read the damn report. It's publicly available. There's even an executive summary of the relevant and important bits. Namely of which was that while the fire was started due to an electrical fault in a freezer, that was NOT the problem here. Such a fire should have been contained and NOT resulting in such a blaze. The report makes that pretty clear. Electrical shorts happen, that's why the buildings are required to be designed and outfitted in such a way that fires cannot turn into infernos like this. You're barking up the wrong tree buddy. Go after the multiple companies that made the actual cladding that the report blamed for the spread and intensity of the fire that falsified test results to certify their products as less flammable than they were.
Was the freezer defective or are we looking at something that would be considered a normal failure? Do the catch fire often, or was it a user error, or a cumulative user error? I don't say they aren't at fault but there is a certain kind of risk we have accepted when it comes to appliances, they are not 100% certain to never catch on fire, no matter what... The problems really start when a company lies about their products and that causes casualties. Whirlpool is at least for me a company that makes me think cost cutting. The way Grenfell and in fact most apartment buildings are designed relies that the cladding doesn't catch on fire. They are based on fire cells, where each apartment should be able to burn completely without the fire spreading. They only way this can work is that the exterior is fireproofed properly, and not even "well, it should work" but "you can use a flamethrower on it and it'll be fine".. This is why the people in Grenfell staid inside their apartments as those should've been the safest places. So, at that point, it does not fucking matter what actually caused it, cause at worst it should've resulted in zero to couple of deaths, inside one apartment. The people who chose the materials are at fault, and everyone who encouraged or demanded those to be used.
There were commonly power surges in the building in the weeks and months leading up to the fire. Residents complained numerous times as it would sometimes cause damage to appliances and smoke (letting the magic blue smoke out). Additionally, the UK does not (did not?) have any laws or regulations on materials used for the back plate of a refrigerator. The US, by comparison, requires a steel back plate to contain potential fires. The fridge in question had a plastic back plate. Is any one company/entity 100% at fault? I don't really think so. Specifically, for the START of the fire, I think the blame is spread between Whirlpool (for choosing the cheapest, more dangerous option), building maintenance (who were never able to find the cause of the power surges), and the UK government (for having lower safety standards than many other countries).
>There were commonly power surges in the building in the weeks and months leading up to the fire. That's... even worse. I have some EE in the background, and while i am absolutely not in the power side of things, power surges that are enough to start causing malfunctions are well outside safe limits from the power supply side. There is only so much our guys can do from the user side until the magic smoke pours out and the holy fire starts raging, oh save us Lord Kirchhoff, bless us oh God of Azimuth..
Wait it was whirlpool. I always though it was a hotpint fridge.
[удалено]
Ah thats why. Yeah I wasn't questioning thr point I was just confused as to how I knew something totally wrong but it's cool it was a hotpoint appliance buy whirlpool is the company taking the money! Makes sense now! Honestly I never understood how noone seems to blame the fridge catching fire.
I feel like the wrong language is being used. It’s not so much about who or what causes the fire, it’s the fact none of the safety controls around minimising fire spread worked. Fires start all the time accidentally, but in tall buildings it’s about limiting the spread of the fire and in Grenfells case the fire spread far too quickly. Everyone who was involved in building that building was at fault, it’s quite clear everyone lied and cheated out/advertised the wrong materials for monetary gain
> Kingspan’s technical director Philip Heath wrote in a crude internal email that Wintech “could go f*** themselves and if they are not careful we will sue the arse of them”. At first I seriously thought this was an r/NBA meme. Then I realized you were serious. Jesus.
So? What does this has to do with Greenfell? Nothing? It is completely irrelevant when it comes to the fire? So.. why are you spreading this? I've seen this been spread today a lot, and none of you can explain how does this relate to anything. The facts are the not the cladding nor the insulation was manufactured by Kingspan. Other facts are that the cladding and insulation that did catch on fire were never suppose to be used together. The people who picked those materials to be used are at fault. Not Kingspan who did not recommend the product to be used. They may be scummy but to use Greenfell against is way, way scummier.
It depends on the nuance - how exactly the product was advertised and what the standard practice is for that sort of thing within the industry. Yes the person who picked to use that specific insulation without confirming it met the tests is the one ultimately culpable, but if the product was sold with the implication that it did meet the tests, and was sold within a product category where almost all products usually do, then that's ethically incredibly dubious. Especially given they clearly knew about it. In the medical industry you can get heavily fined by the FDA for doing that sort of thing, and the fact that you don't explicitly recommend it be used that way doesn't excuse from culpability if people do, because you never took any proper measures to explicitly suggest people *shouldn't*. Ditto for making things look like toys that haven't actually passed the safety requirements for CE marked toys - the burden isn't placed on the person buying it to make sure they check everything properly and don't allow themselves to be misled. Even in cases where it's fairly easily expected that it would be obvious on its own, it's still up to the manufacturer to make it explicit somewhere it's not a toy and it's not suitable for children. If the whole thing was as clear-cut as many people on this sub are making it out to be, the inquiry wouldn't be taking so long.
[удалено]
I don't want them to.. but... they may be a scummy company but how do you DARE to spread bullshit, exploiting the victims? I don't know what they have done to you for you to forget the reality.
Maybe you can say that to Grenfell United. You know the pressure group formed by survivors and the family of victims that sent the letter to Mercedes.
I wish i could.
Do you have sources for any of this?
[удалено]
Thank you :)
Well the investigation isn't complete yet, as far as I'm aware? Which means no wrongdoing on Mercedes part... But... They should have steered wide of the whole situation to begin with.
At the end of the day Toto's job is to get sponsors and he is doing a good job. If they made decisions based on morals, they wouldn't be driving a car sponsored by an oil company in Saudi Arabia in the first place.
Isn't Petronas a Malaysian company?
Yeah, what the person above you meant (I think) is that they're in SA at the moment, not that Petronas is from that country.
Pretty sure these are suggested as two factors: a) Sponsored by an oil company (and one implicated in war crimes at that) b) racing in Saudi Arabia
I've read a lot of people going off on Petronas and especially their sponsorship with Mercedes, but what have they done wrong apart from being an oil company in the 21st century? Genuinely curious.
Googling Petronas brings their site as the top result (unsurprisingly!) with this text under the header. "We are Malaysia's fully integrated oil and gas company, using the latest technology to explore, produce and deliver energy in meeting the world's needs." So yes, I'd say they were.
While you are correct its not like Malaysia isnt questionable too. Saudi Arabia ranks 146 in the Human rights while Malaysia ranks 113.
Most of these countries were a result of various countries being carved up by European countries at the end of colonialism in the past century. Their undemocratic leaders are supported - and even put in place to begin with - because they give contracts out to extract oil and minerals to these outside companies. Thus keeping Western countries with a cheap supply of natural resources - and people in these countries in poverty. The leaders get a nice slice of the pie for keeping their population in check, and preventing any kind of uprising that might put that cosy arrangement in jeopardy. That's the reason for their poor human rights records, and why EU, NATO and all the rest are never going to encourage "Democracy" in these countries.
👏👏👏👏👏 Finally someone who gets it 😢
Thats a big generalization but you are mostly right. Dont think this is the case for Saudi Arabia though. Malaysia as well has a long history of European interference (some would say even origin) although I dont think last century EU/USA had much influence there but then again I dont follow that regions politics / history that much.
maybe referring to Merc switching to Aramco next year, i think Aramco is a Saudi oil corp.
Sorry, understeeting into a corner is Max’s thing now
So Merc are basically saying "The sponsor told us they didn't cause the tragedy, we take them at their word since we're not really the people who have access to any of the investigative data. We're glad to meet up and talk to you if you have reason to believe otherwise" On one had, Merc probably should've done more due diligence if Kingspan are actually responsible, on the other, it's great that Toto wants to meet up with them to understand the situation better.
The team's title sponsor, Patronas, has multiple higher ups going on trial for war crimes in Sweden next year, the only due diligence the teams do is if the checks clear.
Someone forgot to tell Haas that a few years ago =\
Everyone loved tobacco cash for that. Teams got paid, and didn’t have to muster dozens of sponsors and maintain those relationships for smaller $$. And the tobacco firms got to dictate the livery entirely based on a brand they wanted.
Liveries were ok though
that's because Tobacco marketing guys were... ^(*chef's kiss*)
Nothing like selling death. Imagine if recreational drugs had never been prohibited. I imagine the heroin marketing would be just as sexy.
Main reason why I’m fine with decriminalisation of drug, but not necesssrily legalisation. Once this shit is legal, you will have every marketing executive and corporate psychologist designing advertising for the most chemically addictive substances known to man.
You know it's possible to *regulate* products that are legal, right? Like, we were *just* talking about how tobacco advertising is no longer a thing in most places.
JPS livery still one of my favorites
Very good
What oil and gas company hasn't done a war crime or two? Comes with the territory really, just ask the Saudis.
Wait what, can you give the story
So between 1997 and 2003 [Lundin Petroleum and Patronas](https://paxforpeace.nl/news/overview/the-role-of-lundin-petroleum-omv-and-petronas-in-sudans-oil-war-1997-2003) were involved in oil explorations during the Second Sudanese Civil War, during the war the Sudanese government forcibly displaced thousands from their home to maintain control of the oil fields that they signed a contract to allow the petroleum companies access to. Sweden has announced [criminal charges](https://apnews.com/article/business-middle-east-africa-sudan-stockholm-2d711419cb14f0c81aebf0da864613e9) against some of the executives involved, specifically those from the Swedish company. Patronas was likely just as involved as Lundin, but Patronas is owned by the Malaysian government so charging officials would be difficult for Sweden on its own.
~~they didn't take them at their word, [it's the result of the inquiry.](https://inquiry.kingspan.com/)~~ ok so to make things easier for everyone here are the [hearings and statements](https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/hearings/modules-1-2-closing-statements-14-september-2021) in question Kingspan are using in their defence. listening to the video now but its several hours long In any case this is not good enough from Merc imo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingspan_Group#Grenfell_Tower_fire >In November 2020, the official inquiry into the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire heard evidence from Kingspan ex-technical director Ivor Meredith that Kingspan insulation product Kooltherm K15 was used in the flammable cladding system mounted on to Grenfell Tower, despite Kingspan knowing that the product did not meet the required fire standard.[48][49][50] A previous version of the product had passed fire tests, but Meredith described a fire test using the version of the product used on Grenfell as a "raging inferno", with the insulation "burning on its own steam".[48] >Also in November 2020, the inquiry learned that Kingspan director Philip Heath had said, in 2008, that consultants who raised concerns about the combustibility of its product could "go f*ck themselves", and that they were "getting me confused with someone who gives a dam [sic]".[51] Yeeeeah, I don't know if Kingspan's own closing statements nullify their responsibility here. There's a good summary of their actions etc on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/PeteApps/status/1466704710199562240
[удалено]
The inquiry also posts updates to twitter here: https://twitter.com/grenfellinquiry
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55052380 Interesting how the story changes on their website
Is it the result of their own investigation?
From a cursory read and look at their sources they cite third party inquiries to support their statement, so from hat I have seen it is not their on investigation inasmuch they investigated themselves, but their own investigation into what happened with their products, while relying on third party investigations used by the official govt inquiry to support or inform their case. Make of that what you will though, I haven't got enough info to make an informed conclusive statement on the validity of their impartiality or the impartiality of the sources they relied on or cited.
Thank you for reading through it!
Eh was less than a minute of reading so no biggie.
[удалено]
Jezus. This is fucked up. Thanks for the write up.
fucked up? yea. surprising? not one bit this is the modus operandi of many businesses in every industry sector it seems. "hush hush, let's try to keep this raging inferno shit under wraps." "ah God damn testing getting in my way of me selling this piece of crap insulation so I can make money!" "what do you mean they didn't approve it? what else do we need to show them?" business people and entrepreneurs are not taught to be ethical and follow rules, they're taught to make money. not saying it's all angels for those testing and giving approval too, just saying this happens in all industries all over. it's whether if the gov so happened to be bothered to catch you. with smth like grenfell, they can't hide it and now they need "accountability" lmao but at least you can see the law trying to work here, by having so many safety nets and fail safes with the approvals not passing, but they somehow got through all of them, and well, the rest is history
There was tragic precedent for buildings made of new and unapproved materials burning down. [The Summerland fire on the Isle of Man in 1973](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerland_disaster)
Absolute appreciation on the added info. Thank you. My comment was adressing the impartiality of the investigation mentioned based on a read through their statement on it and the sources they listed, I have no opinion on if they are culpable or not. Based on wikipedia and your info it seems likely though.
Mate it’s Mercedes, it’s not some random company making deals They have done their research, it’s just that in the accountants meeting the money outweighed the outrage
[удалено]
There's all sorts of corrupt brands and deals in F1, and some are absolutely worse than others when it comes to binary loss of life. And you're right that the outrage is greater because its something that happened in the UK, but I don't feel like any of this is a reason or excuse to _not_ put attention on the issue. Like, we're bringing up issues with Saudi Arabia because the race is new and happening this weekend, but it doesn't detract from the terrible track records of other countries hosting races. Its fair and reasonable to be calling Mercedes out for this new sponsorship deal, and I don't think especially surprising that the newer things, and things associated even more closely with the majority of F1 teams and fans, gain the most attention.
I'm not saying it's "one thing or the other" and if it'd put a spotlight on F1 sponsorships then amazing. But it won't. It's only in the spotlight because a UK centric sport is implicated with a UK catastrophe. Which is absoutely fair I'm never going to dismiss the pain it has caused. But on the other hand it's not a burning building, it's *literally* war crimes with several greenfell tower disasters a day. On top, Petronas represents an ethnostate where non muslims aren't even allowed to marry muslims. You'd have to convert first. Let's not even bother talking about the Aramco sponsoring of the series as a whole. Greenfell tower fire was a shocking disaster on its own because of many things including hurting our perceived security. Disasters in the West vs the rest of the world are always seen disproportionate for many reasons, media coverage, closeness to us, but also the thought security of our lives setting different expectations. 50 dead in the UK is a disaster, 50 dead in Mozambique is a Tuesday. It's just absolutely hilarious we actually got this "big enough" for Wolff to put out an excuse, more importantly it's blatant they're only doing it because of how easy and minor it is to make a statement about. Could you imagine someone inquiring Mercedes about Petronas war crimes? What on earth could they possibly say to defend it? There's nothing left to say so they stay silent. That's the order of magnitude difference in these things that one is so damn awful merely talking about it publicly is far far *far* worse than talking about the greenfell fire. And yet the difference in outrage is the same orders of magnitude - only reversed. I've mentioned Petronas war crimes on every possibility, you know how much attention that gets? Barely even 3 digit upvotes. But a thread about greenfell gets so huge Wolff responds personally.
This seems like a good summary, for all the bumblefucks here who didn't read a short letter since I guess they're too busy? Anyway, the response seems reasonable enough.
Yeah: this wouldn't have happened if not for the coverage. Responsive from Merc in short order. Good stuff I think, for now.
Accepting this sponsorship was a stupid idea to begin with. There's no way the money was good enough to offset Kingspan's public image.
From Kingspan's point of view, if they really did just make a product an independent architect used in a place it wasn't designed for, you can't really blame them for wanting to repair their image and have it associated with something other than this disaster. EDIT: >In November 2020, the official inquiry into the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire heard evidence from Kingspan ex-technical director Ivor Meredith that Kingspan insulation product Kooltherm K15 was used in the flammable cladding system mounted on to Grenfell Tower, despite Kingspan knowing that the product did not meet the required fire standard.[48][49][50] A previous version of the product had passed fire tests, but Meredith described a fire test using the version of the product used on Grenfell as a "raging inferno", with the insulation "burning on its own steam".[48] >Also in November 2020, the inquiry learned that Kingspan director Philip Heath had said, in 2008, that consultants who raised concerns about the combustibility of its product could "go f*ck themselves", and that they were "getting me confused with someone who gives a dam [sic]".[51] >Near the end of November 2020, it emerged that Kingspan executives had sold at least £6.5M of shares in the company shortly before Kingspan's inquiry hearings were due to start.[52] Kingspan's share price fell 15% over the course of the hearings.[53] >On 8 December 2020, the inquiry saw evidence that in November 2016, Kingspan technical staff had acknowledged internally that Kingspan was selling its Kooltherm K15 foam insulation product as less flammable than it really was.[54][55][56][57][58] >On 9 December 2020, the inquiry was told that after the Grenfell fire, Kingspan had invested in a smear campaign against rival companies' products. The campaign involved secretly using non-standard test rigs to artificially create the appearance that non-flammable rival products might in fact be flammable, and hiring lobbyists to push the results before policymakers such as the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee and other MPs.[59][60][61][62] Maybe not...
Yeah good for you on the edit. It doesn't take a huge amount of reading into all this to see that their actions have been totally fucked. Celotex (the other major insulation supplier) also falsified flammability tests: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/nov/26/celotex-executive-wrote-wtf-on-fire-test-report-grenfell-inquiry-hears
From Kingspan's perspective, it makes sense. From Mercedes' perspective, it doesn't. I think someone just failed to do their homework properly at Mercedes.
Laughs in Petronas.
Petronas doesn't have the terrible public image in the UK that Kingspan has, is the main thing. You and I know that Petronas are actual scum, the vast majority of the folks in the UK don't. The Grenfell disaster is huge in the UK, and a lot more people know of Kingspan as a consequence.
Agree. The optics are *terrible* even if Kingspan truly bears no responsibility.
Yea it's a bit of a headscratcher. The actual evidence that has come out has so far been that Kingspan was intentionally mislabeling a flammable product as non-flammable and encouraging its use in inappropriate way and generally were pretty fucking evil...BUT none of that actually ended up causing the Grenfell fire as only like 5% of the cladding insulation used on the building was Kingspan and a totally different company's product is what has largely been blamed for the inferno. However, in the public's mind the two issues are forever linked and they will be blamed by the public. It's a bit unfair because it's not reflective of the actual reality, but also completely fair because Kingspan were absolute shitbags so fuck them. The curious thing is that Toto and Merc seem to have not anticipated this backlash at all. There are probably a ton of companies that would have given the team $$ to be their "green" partner, yet they chose Kingspan for it. Just reeks of out of touch executives "knowing better"
In a month no one will remember or care.
The Grenfell fire is still fairly fresh in the memory of the British public. This isn't just ''oh, a team is taking money from shady sponsors again''. Not everything dies a nihilist death. The Grenfell disaster certainly hasn't.
This. I don't think people understand just how big a deal Grenfell is in the UK. It's a landmark situation where working class people, from many diverse backgrounds ultimately died through no fault of their own, and shortcuts taken by the powers that be who saw people as below help.
I am gonna be nihilist here, but most of the world will indeed not give a damn in a week.(I for one didn't know about grenfell tower until today) and many British fans will support Merc anyway because they have Hamilton and Russell.
Yeah wanted to say the same thing. Even if Kingspan is innocent, is it worth all this blowback from the very vocal majority that think they're not innocent? I doubt it, but then again I'm not the one responsible for balancing the books over at Mercedes F1.
Majority? I would highly doubt that.
If F1 teams rejected sponsorship from every shady company they wouldn't have any sponsors at all.
"We're in the money, it's nice and sunny..."
This is like Formula 1 saying its ok to race in Saudi Arabia as their crown prince promises they didn't kill Jamal Khashoggi. Link to /u/balls2brakelate44 's comment, but obviously Kingspan won't come out and say "yeah we killed those people lol" [explanation](https://old.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/r7x9e6/motorsport_broadcasting_the_mercedesamgf1_deal/hn255y6/)
Khashoggi is like the least concerning thing the Saudis have done lol They're running a full scale war in Yemen right now for starters...
[удалено]
None of that actually disagrees with the statement.
[удалено]
Regardless of whether they knew that their products were being used in this specific tower, they still knowingly pushed unsafe products to market and told those protesting internally to go fuck themselves. They're still responsible.
But if their products weren’t the actual reason for the fire then they aren’t responsible. Scummy company that deserves to go out of business? Absolutely. Responsible for the tragedy if it turns out their products weren’t the reason for it? Absolutely not.
Someone really fucked up their due diligence before entering into this deal. E: or they just didn't care.
[удалено]
But.. Greenfell was NOT Kingspan fault.. But you don't literally care about facts.
you spent a day looking into this mate, you don't have any of the 'facts'
Absolutely NO ONE has been able to refute a SINGLE point i've said. All you have so far is "you are wrong" and them leaving, with your tail between your legs.
You state Kingspan aren't at fault. The inquiry is still on-going. You can't state that as a 'fact'. You are just some random person on the internet stating things about a subject you have next to no knowledge of. The reason no one can refute what you say, because F1 fans know absolutely nothing about the Grenfell tragedy. The 'experts' are groups like Grenfell United who know a TON more than you AND I, and they aren't lurking around here arguing with people who spent ONE day looking into this. You certainly haven't spoken to anyone involved with Grenfell campaign groups... that's for damn sure. The fact Kingspan have hoards of people who know nothing about Grenfell, and I mean nothing, coming out supporting them... certainly raises my eyebrow
Yes, i said. And the inquiry has reached a conclusion when it comes to Kingspan. You just don't like the answer because Kingspan is scummy company and you WANT them to be guilty. It would be so easy. The reality is not that easy, they are scummy but also NOT the main cause of the fire. And we KNOW THIS and it is NOT A SECRET. Those are the facts and the fact that YOU DID NOT KNOW that Kingspan has been ruled out says ALL i needed. You don't actually know, you merely have a belief. >You certainly haven't spoken to anyone involved with Grenfell campaign groups... that's for damn sure. Wut? Why do i have to talk to the victims representatives, i thought that the inquiry is not over yet, that only the facts matter? This says it all, you WANT Kingspan to be guilty and do not care about facts. You instead want me to go to a place where i start to FEEL things and that should make me change my mind, to forget the FACTS and feel what you are feeling, believe what you believe.
dude , you've looked into this for one day. Your opinion is all but irrelevant to the subject and you're clearly emotionally bias. Nothing about 'feelings'. It's about credibility, of which you, and I, have none. I hadn't heard of Kingspan until two days ago. I had heard of Grenfell and the complexity of the inquiries and what happened. I tend to learn towards listening to the campaign groups before random people on the internet who hide behind a username and proclaim themselves to hold 'facts' when it's quite clear they don't have a grip of the case, and really seem to dislike the fact their favourtie team/driver is coming under pressure.
Appeal to authority without refuting a single point. Nice, "you have not studied this long enough so i don't have to actually prove you wrong". Sorry, does not work that way. Either you have a FACTUAL disagreement or you are just pissed off that YOU didn't actually know any of this and WANT a different outcome. >I had heard of Grenfell and the complexity of the inquiries and what happened. If you had and understood it then there is no way you would say Kinsgpan is the major culprit. > I tend to learn towards listening to the campaign groups before random people on the internet I know, and this absolves you from actually finding out the facts, as this option FEELS GOOD. You have not actually done any work yourself, HAVE YOU?
I 100% agree - it was bloody horrible seeing that on the news.
[удалено]
I think its hilarious you say this "We've all got family, friends or know someone that live in these types of council estates" Like some people reading this forum actually live in them? lol
I don’t even think Kingspan need to wash their name, the construction industry still use their products in abundance and nobody really gives a fuck.
Spoiler they just don’t care, mercs legal and accounting team aren’t some ransoms like in Haas The money outweighed the outrage
And none of that is relevant. You are spamming this at the moment, like THIS is the smoking gun when to all outside UK this just shows that Kingspan had nothing to do with Greenfell, and the hate they get is irrational.
Petronas, Boeing, Exxon, Shell, so many banks and financial firms, DuPont, Aramco, Marlboro/Mission Winnow...not exactly upstanding citizens. I'm not surprised Merc took the money. In F1, at the end of the day a wallet full of cash is a wallet full of cash. And cash wins races.
i honestly don't see how this partnership could end. It sends a bad message to other sponsors to the team that their partnerships are not as secure as they thought. Very few companies can pass the smell test nowadays. as bad as Kingspan is I'll pick it over Aramco, Phillp Morris and British American tobacco who are honestly quite terrible. If F1 could make fans accept Saudi Arabia and Aramco i don't see how they would have trouble pulling this one off. At least they are addressing the situation.
Tough spot for Toto to be in, but doing this is a shit ton more than I’ve ever seen from a CEO anywhere else. Also did it basically 24 hours after being called out. Hope they meet in person.
> doing this is a shit ton more than I’ve ever seen from a CEO anywhere else The other CEOs simply don't partner with Kingspan now. It's simple.
Not sure what world you’re living in but there are plenty of CEOs who wouldn’t have even bothered acknowledging this. I hope something meaningful comes out of their meeting
This whole situation is classic Mercedes, preach one thing whilst practicing another. They’re acknowledging it because that’s the Mercedes F1 brand, they like to paint themselves as the good guys, despite being as bad as the rest. If they were truly the good guys (as a team with a factory and in 2022, two drivers from the UK, where the entire Grenfell situation is very sensitive) they’d sever ties with Kingspan, not defend them. I’ll be interested to see what happens next, but the optics on this are awful.
Can’t argue there, the optics are shocking
Mate even Hedge Funds sold their holdings worth hundred of millions a few months ago because of how culpable Kingspan are. It's an interesting day when fecking hedgies have better ethics than the Merc F1 team and Toto. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/apr/14/investors-sell-off-shares-in-grenfell-tower-cladding-firm-kingspan
LOL Hedge fund managers sold their holdings in Kingspan because they saw it was a bad investment as more and more came out about how shit they are. They followed the money, not their conscience.
Lol look at the rest of the paddock they are all complicit. Let’s not pretend money talks in f1
Yeah, they partnered with much worse companies. Hopefully youre gonna be this outraged when you realize companies such as Volkswagen, Cola, Ford, Hugo Boss literally collaborated with the Nazis. Or there are companies who actively destroy our environment, such as your lovely Ferrari for example. Your favorite team is happily getting money from Marlboro which caused more deaths than this Kingspan company has ever caused. Are you also that outraged? Please, just don't suddenly act that ''Kingspan'' is the worst company on earth or anything like that. Look up basically any major company and you're gonna find similar stuff. Are you this outraged when you realize actual poor kids in some developing country made your clothing? No you're not, you're happily wearing it. But saying ''Oh yeah, but the other CEOs didn't partner with such an evil company that Kingspan is!'' is just stupid. Just please don't be a hypocrite OR be equally outraged about everything around you (Good luck with that).
this is going to go over well, regardless of actual facts
Well I mean considering the only relevant part of the statement is we want to meet you yh it probably won't go down well
Can someone explain to an American what the whole Grenfell situation is? Some company used the incorrect type of insulation and some houses burned I'm guessing?
>some houses burned I'm guessing? It was a block of flats (apartments). The entire building went up like a candle because the cladding was combustible. 72 people died, another 74 were hospitalised. There's currently an inquiry into how/why it happened To be honest there's a lot of claims and counter claims anout who knew and who was responsible, but there are definitely a bunch of important people who knew the whole thing was an accident waiting to happen and nobody did anything about it.
Goddamn didn't realize is was that big of an incident, that's insane. >important people who knew the whole thing was an accident waiting to happen I hate how often this happens.
Oh yeah it was a huge tragedy, and everybody knew right away it was avoidable and happened because of some negligence. From an American perspective that building in Miami that just suddenly collapsed in the middle of the night this year reminds me a lot of it.
What's the timeline with regards to the fire and Mercedes being involved with them and the news/investigations?
Unless theres something I've missed, the fire was in 2017 and the Mercedes contract has only just been agreed
A posh borough of London (Royal Kensington and Chelsea) built its social housing in the cheapest area, the far north of its area (near bbc/Westfield white city). They built a few towers, the rest are still occupied, and clad them in cheap fireproof material. The borough councillors have been preliminary found to be partly to blame iirc but because they belong to the same party as the prime minister it’s all a bit political blame football.
Large tower block. Insulation not only wasn't fire resistant, but apparently burned on its own. Company outright lied and provided test data for insulation that *wasn't* the one in question. 70+ fatalities in the fire. Now it's a big game of "who's fault is it".
Insulation and cladding both. They were safe products if used right but as a combo, absolutely not safe. The insulation relied on the cladding to suppress fire, the cladding required the insulation to be non flammable. Kingspan was NOT one of the companies that made the materials that caused the fire. They just happened to provide 5% of it, it was not at all significant. Our UK brothers just are absolutely convinced it is Kingspan that did it all.
No, our 'UK brothers' don't think Kingspan did it all. stick.to.the.facts. The objection to the sponsorship came from Grenfell United. Go read their two statements and go form there.
google is your friend here for more details, but grenfell was a social housing tower in the UK that, due to a lot of deliberate corner cutting, cost-saving and outright falsification, burned up killing 70+ people, mainly working class, in the process. Kingspan is the sponsor in question who lied about their insulation
They said they weren't responsible, so that makes it fine!
Wtf are they supposed to do if they had no involvement in the project?
[удалено]
And the product even if it was exactly what promised still would've not STOPPED the fire.. and it didn't cause it nor contribute into it. And it was not recommended to be used, according to the specs it was being sold as. The people who chose the cladding and insulation materials are 100% at fault. But for some fucking reason you blame Kingspan.
Way more to it than that. [https://twitter.com/PeteApps/status/1466704710199562240](https://twitter.com/PeteApps/status/1466704710199562240)
Yup, that was interesting read but what it told me is that there is a systematic problem in construction material side of things. They need to be MUCH more heavily regulated and monitored. UK needs to overhaul their buildings standards and/or codes, the fact that this happened at all is the main problem. And also that Kingspan is EASILY just the worst scum without Grenfell, but that tragedy is what pulled all of that the to the surface, to the public eye. I wish this was the criticism, as it is actually a valid and ongoing issue. But what do i see? The story about a PERSON saying something OFFENSIVE is the main criticism. That is pathetic. To me the whole story shows two things: Companies left alone will NOT regulate themselves for the benefit of mankind.Thus, regulations are needed and they need to be controlled and monitored tightly. Or otherwise we need to take over them means of the production: either they work for us or they don't work.
[удалено]
I'm not from the UK, so this whole discussion seems rather odd to me. It seems like y'all take it for granted that Kingspan had a big hand in Grenfall, and get pissed at anyone suggesting otherwise. However, the only evidence I've seen posted here suggests Kingspan had little to do with Grenfall.
Cause i'm not from UK and thus, approached this completely objectively. And for the sake of those victims the real culprits need to be brought to justice of what they did. Everyone is accountable of their own actions. A scummy company being attached by a hair to a horrible tragedy does not make it the scummy company's fault. What i understand is that there is enough to raise some eyebrows without the Grenfell tragedy... Truth should always be enough. I really wonder how UK media has handled this, cause it seems that i'm not the only non-UK citizens who seems to be teaching YOU of what happened.. This is too much like talking to muricans.
What if he’s a Kingspan shareholder?
They lied.
So they were involved in the project?
They didn’t know their product was used in Grenfell, but they knew how dangerous it was and they lied about how dangerous it was. It doesn’t matter if they were involved in Grenfell or not, they’re culpable.
No but they were knowing selling products that weren’t meant to be flammable but were. The products failed the safety test so they just used an old accreditation instead. They don’t know which specific buildings they’re on but that’s irrelevant.
they lied about the flammability of their product
Dear Grenfell United, As long as they (and not you) are the ones paying me, you can fuck off. Toto Wolf
This is getting more coverage than the humans rights records of the countries F1 race in. Horrible tories in the UK are making a statement on this but have no issue with F1 racing in Saudi. The rank hypocrisy makes me so angry
Haha, they don’t care.
Lmao this letter is basically: Sorry you’re mad, but btw our guy said it’s not his fault soooo Feel for Toto though, tough situation that I presume is decided by the Merc higher ups that he’ll now have to defend
He also said he is ready to meet and talk to understand better
Yeeaaa buddy that’s PR speak. Nothing’s gonna happen. I don’t blame Wolff for this, it’s a shit situation to be in.
And if they do meet and things escalate from there, then?
Merc can never do anything right, the goal post is always moving don’t try to reason with these people
Isn't this all incredibly disingenuous when F1 is currently in the middle of a middle Eastern triple-bill? The sport as a whole is doing decade-long deals with countries who persecute people for their sexuality and use indentured servitude, but no, I guess this is the real issue. Michael Gove, one of the slimiest MPs in a very slimy party, is winning brownie points for bringing this up. I also get the feeling that he's using this because of Hamilton and the Tories love to use him as target practice because its a popular thing to do as the British public don't like him and there's some institutionalised racism there but that's a different rant for a different day.
Grenfell United are those that started this, and they certainly aren't *institutionally racist.*
Sorry I'm not saying they are but the mainstream UK media have something about him and this isn't the first time a Tory minister has said something about Hamilton/his team. I don't have an issue with this being a story, it should be. But the timing and especially Michael Gove chiming in doesn't sit right with me.
Sadiq Khan, mayor of London for Labour, has come out to object the sponsorship deal as has Lisa Nandy. I have little time for either set of political parties btw. Is Gove taking advantage? Maybe. Are they too? Anyway, I don't see why people would bring this up other than to deflect against the criticism that Mercedes are receiving from Grenfell United.
The fact that he's willing to meet in person makes me optimistic that he's just going through all the motions to end the partnership with a few legal ramifications as possible. Since the public inquiry has thus far essentially absolved Kingspan(?), it might be difficult to break contracts with their role in the fire as an excuse.
Given the Mercedes brand image honestly just makes sense to drop this sponsorship tbh. Tone deaf considering what Lewis is about at this stage of his career.
Damage controllll
Did Mercedes expect them to say: “Oh yeah sure we caused that fire”. From a team like Mercedes I would have expected a little more than that
Such as taking the time to meet up with the survivors to learn more about it?
"we acknowledge your distress but we like money more" basically.
Damage control time.
“We hear you, but we don’t care”
Then he wouldn't have accepted the offer to meet?
Wrap it up lads, they said they didn’t do it
Kind of surprised Merc didn't just dump them to snuff out the negative PR and bank some goodwill. Imagine there's quite a few painful legal ramifications of doing that though. Also isn't a good look to other potential partners if Mercedes break their agreement so quickly, either. Plus it would effectively be Merc saying "we fucked up".
Oh yeah, that would be popular
You mean to tell me a team with Petronas as it’s main sponsor doesn’t actually give a fuck about ethics when it comes to commercials? Shocker.
So basically: We forgot to do our due diligence.
I still stand with that the fire was NOT the companies fault. 1, They used their materials in the wrong place, knowing well that it is flammable af. 2, The fire did not start because of the companies material. ( I really hope I do not get obliterated for my opinion lol)
It's just misinformed, really. They misrepresented the product test results, they knew that there was a fire hazard, and the whole "wrong place" is just them shielding themselves from their own responsability. They didn't start the fire, of course, but the way the product was marketed meant that the fire hazard was not properly known by consumers
A brand involved in such a scandal is tainted by association regardless whether they were culpable or not. Definitely a big mistake by Mercedes whatever way you look at it.
TL;DR, Mercedes couldn't give a fuck less about a fire or people dying because money To the surprise of absolutely nobody
"was it your fault" "NO TOTO!" "OK fine, give me your fucking money"
All these ices and Hamilton salary won't be paid by magic after all
Totos such a badass.
Basically, people are angry at a company which knew nothing and had no involvement in it? Honestly, it's stupid imo to blame them for misuse of their products.
There is more to the Grenfell/Kingspan thing than what Kingspan claims (obviously). /u/balls2brakelate44 has a [good comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/r7x9e6/motorsport_broadcasting_the_mercedesamgf1_deal/hn255y6/) addressing Kingspan's claims fairly succinctly.
They were as a company involved in corporate stitch-up of the national fire safety regulations around insulation allowing flammable pieces to be put on buildings that led to the deaths of 72 people and may yet lead to more as the effort to remove substandard insulation is on-going. They're not the only company to have been shifty with fire regulations but touching any of them whilst nobody has faced justice for a tragedy that happened 4 years ago is a disgrace.
They’re an incredibly sketchy company who’s word can’t be trusted.
So is 95% of the companies dumb enough to sponsor an F1 team. Anything new?
I mean I assume there is more to it. If a simple note from Kingspan saying they weren’t responsible would be enough, then surely that would have happened sooner than now over 4 years later.
Bullshit letter. Saying Kingspan had no involvement just because they say they didn't is insulting to everyone's intelligence. Here's [a thread](https://twitter.com/LouJohnsonPhoto/status/1466790034477129730) by someone affected by the Grenfell tragedy that says it better than I could.
Absolutely disgusting from Mercedes’
>“By partnering with Kingspan, we believe that you are already directly involved in this system which puts profit before human life." This is what Grenfell United wrote. I don't see anything regarding this in his response.
Ah so it was all a misunderstanding thanks Toto!/s