Jump to content


Photo

F1 sponsorship


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 Dunc

Dunc
  • Member

  • 477 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 May 2012 - 21:32

As I've said before, I'm a younger nostalgist (http://forums.autosp...w...ounger&st=0) amd hope an old timer can enlighten me on something.

In the days before cars became flying fag packets, how did teams promoe their sponsors? You see pics of drivers with Dunlop, Shell, Firestone etc on their overalls, were the companies really happy at just having that?

Advertisement

#2 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Member

  • 14,745 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 15 May 2012 - 21:39

Teams promoted their sponsors by being successful. The sponsors then made much of these successes in their ads in the various media.

#3 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 15 May 2012 - 22:34

The likes of Jim Clark and Jack Brabham used to be present for the opening of Esso outlets...

They would, of course, pose for photographs with their Dunlop tyres or their Firestones or Goodyears, at times cars would be put on show in places where the sponsors would benefit.

And, of course, they didn't interrupt the smooth flow of cash through the sponsor's books by delaying in banking their cheques.

#4 arttidesco

arttidesco
  • Member

  • 5,775 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 15 May 2012 - 23:58

Our family got it's first black and white telly in 1967 back in those steam powered days picture quality from live broadcast events would not have been up to making out much detail on even the gaudiest of sponsors colour schemes. GLTL cars simply looked many shades of grey on telly when they came out in 1968. I believe up until 1968 there was some kind of FIA sanctioned limit on what was permitted to appear on cars beyond national colours of entrants anyway.



#5 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 May 2012 - 00:52

I don't think the FIA had limits...

But various country's ruling bodies had limits. And they were stretched when the GLTL deal came about when the cars were in New Zealand. Australia's CAMS had to push through more tolerant rules very quickly, the cars were coming here next.

#6 Gary Davies

Gary Davies
  • Member

  • 2,100 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 16 May 2012 - 01:15

Dunc, this is a typical example of what Tim is referring to (Albeit in this case two wheeled motor sport).

Posted Image
(Found via Google.)

#7 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 May 2012 - 07:45

Originally posted by Dunc
As I've said before, I'm a younger nostalgist click here and hope an old timer can enlighten me on something.

In the days before cars became flying fag packets, how did teams promoe their sponsors? You see pics of drivers with Dunlop, Shell, Firestone etc on their overalls, were the companies really happy at just having that?


Not being able to click on that link has been bugging me... I want to read about this kid...

#8 Stephen W

Stephen W
  • Member

  • 11,843 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 16 May 2012 - 08:13

Posted Image

Ferodo amongst others made a BIG thing about British successes in motor sport not just F1.

#9 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,139 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 16 May 2012 - 08:58

Stirling Moss featured on advertising hoardings advertising BP. I remember one that featured him holding the reins of nine or ten wildish horses. "BP = horsepower" was the message.

Any copy of Motor Sport, Autosport, Motor, Autocar etc would always have adverts featuring successesd using Esso, BP, Castrol, Ferodo, Lucas, Dunlop, etc covering GP's, major sports car races, rallies, national races and including class wins. I think major successes would also feature in the national papers.

I also remember from my schooldays the annual "Castrol Achievements" books that were included in every motoring magazine and advertised as "Send SAE" in the likes of The Eagle and The Meccano Magazine. The "Achievements" included photos of all successes by Castrol users: from Mercedes in GP and sports cars, through Aston Martin, BMC speed records, rallies, motorcycle racing, US national racing, down to events as obscure as the Malayan Hillclimb Championship, if they had a good photo of a Castrol user.

#10 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 May 2012 - 09:37

Of course, it wasn't always that they used the sponsor's product...

One Mini driver in Sydney used to have Castrol sponsorship and got a drum full of Castrol oil every meeting. He sold that... and then went out to the airport and bought a drum of Mobil Redband aviation oil.

One meeting he didn't have the time or the money or something so he used the Castrol... and blew up the engine!

#11 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 16 May 2012 - 11:28

Not being able to click on that link has been bugging me... I want to read about this kid...

Try now, Ray.

#12 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 May 2012 - 21:16

Your superior powers win through, Twinny...

I could have done it a couple of ways, I guess, but I thought it better to quote him with alterations so everyone could. Now they have two chances and the thread's nicely revived!

Geoff's contribution should be read by all, by the way.

#13 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:04

As I mentioned earlier, drivers would sometimes pose for photos especially for their sponsors... like Jack Brabham in this Repco ad:

Posted Image

Or they'd take their cars to the track to give some help to sponsors... Leo Geoghegan and the Lotus 39 at the Warwick Farm short circuit mid-week:

Posted Image

Another example of advertising where racing successes are mentioned, though I'm sure the photo in the middle of Brabham and Hulme was posed for the purpose:

Posted Image

#14 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,139 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 17 May 2012 - 20:47

Even in the thirties as this post on the "1938 Antwerp GP" thread shows

#15 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 17 May 2012 - 22:23

That is merely advertising the product using racing as evidence of performance...

I'm sure the OP accepted that this happens. What he wants to know about is other things, above and beyond using the product and winning with it.

Mind you, it is a nice ad!

#16 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,081 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 18 May 2012 - 18:07

I think that Englebert did pay a retainer to teams using their tyres. It was this that kept Ferrari using them during the 50s rather than the generally superior Pirellis.

Drivers' overalls were not always a reliable guide to products used. For example, tony Brooks won the 1958 Belgian Grand Prix wearing Avon overalls, although his Vanwall certainly didn't have their tyres. Avon advertised the 1958 Aston TT win as being by CAS Brooks and co-driver, presumably because Moss was not under contract to them. Similarly, the Nurburgring 1,000 kms win that year was advertised by BP as being by Moss and co-driver.

Most of the examples quoted on this thread have been trade sponsors, either in the form of retainers or win bonuses. There were far fewer non-trade sponsors: Moss and Hawthorn both featured in advertisements for Craven-A cigarettes in the early 50s but I can't think of many more. Raymond Mays did receive support from Champagne and Brandy companies in the 20s but i think that was pain in kind rather than cash.



#17 AAGR

AAGR
  • Member

  • 209 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 18 May 2012 - 20:08

...... but I think that was pain in kind rather than cash.


'pain in kind...' ? Depends on how much he drank on the night before a race, I guess ?

:drunk:

GRAHAM R


#18 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 18 May 2012 - 21:23

Originally posted by Roger Clark
.....There were far fewer non-trade sponsors: Moss and Hawthorn both featured in advertisements for Craven-A cigarettes in the early 50s but I can't think of many more.....


This takes them outside the role of sponsors...

They were not putting signage on the cars, nor (undoubtedly) contributing to the running of the cars. These drivers merely had a 'job' with the manufacturer to help make their advertisements attract people who respected them.

#19 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,081 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 18 May 2012 - 21:41

This takes them outside the role of sponsors...

They were not putting signage on the cars, nor (undoubtedly) contributing to the running of the cars. These drivers merely had a 'job' with the manufacturer to help make their advertisements attract people who respected them.

I think you understand the term differently from me.

Advertisement

#20 Kpy

Kpy
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 19 May 2012 - 10:45

This takes them outside the role of sponsors...

They were not putting signage on the cars, nor (undoubtedly) contributing to the running of the cars. These drivers merely had a 'job' with the manufacturer to help make their advertisements attract people who respected them.


Maybe, as Roger says, not sponsorship in your vocabulary, but certainly sponsorship as understood within the sport today.
Ayrton Senna was supported by Banco Nacional and Lewis Hamilton is supported by Reebok. Neither firm was given space on the McLaren, and in Lewis' case Reebok may not even appear on his overalls.

These companies are called "personal sponsors" - try a Google "personal sponsors formula 1" ;)

#21 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 19 May 2012 - 11:04

Marlboro also did a lot of 'personal sponsorships'...

But the way I see it, those Craven A ads were the result of the advertising agencies looking around for known identities to associate with their product. They were paid a fee that related to the perceived value of their names in association with the cigarette brand.

I'm quite sure Sir Stirling looked upon it as a paying job rather than a sponsorship. Unlike bonuses he got from BP etc for racing performances.

#22 Kpy

Kpy
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 19 May 2012 - 11:12

But the way I see it, those Craven A ads were the result of the advertising agencies looking around for known identities to associate with their product. They were paid a fee that related to the perceived value of their names in association with the cigarette brand.

Do you think Lewis Hamilton's Reekbok money arrives for any other reason?


#23 macoran

macoran
  • Member

  • 3,989 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 19 May 2012 - 11:40

Very good historical overview of F1 sponsorship here:
http://en.wikipedia....orship_liveries, all arranged under the following headings per team
Main colour(s) Additional colour(s) Livery sponsor(s) Additional major sponsor(s) Non-tobacco livery changes

just not much information on the early years excepting for the info that the Ferraris were red and the Lotus green with yellow as additional colour

#24 nicanary

nicanary
  • Member

  • 463 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 19 May 2012 - 13:56

It's interesting how different forum members view the question of what represents sponsorship - I would hazard a guess that a barrister would contemplate for several hours at £500 a pop, and still say he needed more time.
The originator of this thread did advise us that he was a younger nostalgist, and my guess is that he has never known the sport other than the way it is today.It's an expensive business, always was, but the costs today are so huge that sponsors are essential, certainly at anything above club level. Before Colin Chapman started "the rot" in 1968, Grand Prix teams were funded in various ways - either a major manufacturer (Mercedes), a racing car maker who built road cars as a means of income (Ferrari), a rich industrialist (Vanwall), or a small "garagiste" who had to sell replica cars to pay for the racing (Cooper). There was assistance from the trade, which was repaid by advertising success, but for many teams it was necessary to rely on start and prize money. (Yes, Dunc, back then the teams were paid to race - no $30m to Bernie for the privilege).
The adverts which have been referred to, where drivers were involved with cigarettes or similar, are in my opinion endorsements, not sponsorship.Similarly, the retainers paid to drivers by the trade companies, such as oil, tyres, brakes etc., were not really sponsorship - they didn't pay for the driver to go racing, they were simply a useful addition to his income.He usually got a percentage of the prize money as reward from the entrant.
It was not uncommon for even top drivers to race all season without a written contract - litigation was almost unheard of then, and gentlemens' agreements were literally that.I think Rob Walker would have found legal contracts quite distasteful.The wonderful thing is that drivers were selected on quality, rather than how much money they could bring to the table. (And now you wonder why we old codgers think the old days were the best).
So there you go - race organisers obtained income from gate receipts or state assistance. They then paid the teams start and prize money. The teams shared this out to the drivers and mechanics. The fuel, oil, brake companies who supplied the winning car got the chance to advertise this. Everybody's happy.No hype, no personal appearances (if a driver paid a visit to a sick child in hospital, he didn't seek newspaper coverage or photo-opportunities),no BS. Proper, pure sport - even Enzo usually played ball.

#25 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 19 May 2012 - 14:20

And then there were some major sponsors who actually funded the team...

The team then ran under their name, even without signage.

#26 nicanary

nicanary
  • Member

  • 463 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 19 May 2012 - 14:47

And then there were some major sponsors who actually funded the team...

The team then ran under their name, even without signage.



Point taken. Yeoman Credit, for example. I knew I'd get caught out, but I was attempting to give an overview of the sport pre-1968. I feel that was the date when things got out of hand, so to speak. The thread seemed IMHO to be going a bit off the point.

#27 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 19 May 2012 - 15:26

And some wealthy private patrons, of course...

You can surely name a few of them?

#28 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,139 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 19 May 2012 - 15:47

Again, a wealthy patron is different from a sponsor. A sponsor seeks an advertising benefit for his money; a patron doesn't.
A few patrons are The Hon Dorothy Paget ("Blower" Bentley), Major Edward Thomson (Ecurie Ecosse), Bob Chase (Mike Hawthorn), Major Rupert Robinson (Innes Ireland),

#29 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 54,430 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 19 May 2012 - 15:57

My point was, however, that they are a part of the scenario that was pre-1968...

Rob Walker and Guglielmo Dei also come to mind.

#30 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,139 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 19 May 2012 - 16:32

Agreed.

Sponsorship, endorsement and patronage are different

If a fuel, oil, spark plug, shock absorber, electrical equipment or other motoring related company makes a payment to a team, before an event, on the understanding that, if the car is successful, they can advertise that "So-and-so won such-and-such using Brand X" that is sponsorship. If that company pay a team or driver to put their logo on the car, or the truck, or the driver's overalls that is also sponsorship.

If, after the event, a company pay to be allowed to advertise "So-and-so winner of the such-and-such used Brand X" or "So-and-so smokes Brand A", "So-and-so and his wife recommend Viagra" then it is product endorsement not sponsorship even if the team or drive use the money to pay for their racing.

If someone pays to help a team or driver out of altruism (with no anticipation of any reward) then it is patronage.

Then we have paying the organisers of an event to include your brand name - the Redex Round-Australia trial, the Woolmark British Grand Prix, etc. This is another form of sponsorship but is more closely tied to advertising. This can cause problems when the event sponsor is in direct competition with a team sponsor, eg when Amoco sponsored the 1960 Sebring 12 hours and insisted all competitors used Amoco petrol and Ferrari were contracted to Shell and Porsche to BP ...

#31 Allan Lupton

Allan Lupton
  • Member

  • 3,101 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 19 May 2012 - 17:54

Then we have paying the organisers of an event to include your brand name - the Redex Round-Australia trial, the Woolmark British Grand Prix, etc. This is another form of sponsorship but is more closely tied to advertising.

Confused me the other weekend when I was watching the Spanish effone race which I thought was at Barcelona but the graphics said Santander. I am told that Santander in this case referred to the bank that sponsored it, rather than the town near which it was taking place.

The British GP went through a phase of John Player sponsorship and I can't remember if cars sponsored by other tobacco companies had to do anything to avoid the conflict. Perhaps there wasn't any other tobacco sponsorship at that time as I can't say I paid much attention.

Edited by Allan Lupton, 19 May 2012 - 17:57.


#32 ChrisJson

ChrisJson
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 19 May 2012 - 19:03

At the 1974 John Player Grand Prix there was the Texaco-Marlboro McLarens,
the Iso-Marlboros and the Embassy Lolas. As far as I know there was no
restrictions on the advertising on their cars.

Christer

Edited by ChrisJson, 20 May 2012 - 01:32.


#33 nicanary

nicanary
  • Member

  • 463 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 20 May 2012 - 10:38

I recall the Fosters British GP as well. The Beeb always had problems with that.

Doug Nye will know better than anyone how Jenks got on with Lotus when he refused to refer to them in his reports as John Player Specials. I'd be curious to know if he was "persona non grata" near their paddock place.

This advertising malarkey is just part of the sport today - back in the 50s/60s it seemed so much more "gentlemanly".

#34 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,923 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 20 May 2012 - 20:09

Ah yes, a few cans of Foster's, a packet of John Players Specials, and some Durex in your back pocket. Happy days for some, but nightmares for poor old Auntie Beeb.

#35 nicanary

nicanary
  • Member

  • 463 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 21 May 2012 - 14:02

Not strictly speaking about F1, but I'm presently reading Peter Harper's book "Destination Monte", published in 1964. He outlines some of the regulations for the rally, including -
"Competitors are strictly forbidden under pain of exclusion from the rally to carry any signs or lettering on themselves or their cars which can be considered commercial publicity."

Oh how times have changed.














#36 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,139 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 26 May 2012 - 18:19

The latest Motor Sport has a feature on a collection of Alberto Ascari memorabilia including his [1-page] contract with Ferrari for 1953. Paraphrasing part of it, the caption says

The deal that Enzo offered in 1953 would give Ascari 50% of the start and prize money that he won, as well as 50% of any money that sponsors Shell, Pirelli and champion gave to the team when they posted those results.

( my italics).
I read that to say sponsors paid by results they could advertise