Ross, your criteria appears to be to rule out any sponsorship deal other than ING for one reason or another - just so you're right! But the fact is that there have been a number of "major" (your word) new sponsors attracted to F1 in the last few years, from Virgin to Verizon, Blackberry to Burn - whether you like it or not!
Being fair to Ross, he's talking about title sponsors. Of your list:
Virgin: Dabbled as a minor sponsor at Brawn, came in as a team owner, and sold out to Marussia in a hurry. Was never a title sponsor in the normal title sponsor role.
Verizon: Not a title sponsor. IIRC, only involved due to being a Vodafone associated brand that made more sense for the American rounds.
Blackberry: Not a title sponsor.
Burn: Not a title sponsor.
Still think it was F1's biggest mistake to give into political pressure and ban tobacco sponsorship. Partly explains why so many teams are in financial dire straits these days.
F1 didn't give in. When the ban came into force, it was because for the vast majority of races on the calendar tobacco advertising was either already illegal, or would very soon become illegal. It was either ban tobacco sponsorship appearing on the cars, or face having TV revenue slashed because they wouldn't be able to race and/or broadcast into a growing number of countries (including the entirety of the EU, plus other long-term races such as Australia).
The ban isn't on tobacco sponsorship per se, either - IIRC Marlboro continued to sponsor Ferrari long after the on-car branding was banned. It wasn't until mid-season in 2011 that "Marlboro" was removed from the team name, and I believe Marlboro are still shovelling money into the team despite having no actual branding.