Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Sponsorship in F1 - how does it work?


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#1 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 09 July 2014 - 16:58

How does sponsorship work in F1?

 

Is it a case of putting your sticker on the car for X amount of money or is there more involved?

 

Who approaches who? The sponsor, or does the team have a 'scout'?

 

Does the size of the logo determine the amount of money paid?

 

What is in it for the sponsor, apart from people seeing their logo and potential boosted sales? PR from the team? A few free tickets thrown in?

 

What interest would say an American sponosor have in a 'European' sport? What is their return on investment?

 

How is the ROI calculated?

 

Sorry if it all sounds naive, but after paying corporation tax etc, most big companies are not left with huge amounts of cash reserves of money.


Edited by Ferrari_F1_fan_2001, 10 July 2014 - 10:49.


Advertisement

#2 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 6,841 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 09 July 2014 - 17:39

1 - Depends how you want to integrate the company brand.  Could be like many McLaren sponsors in that there is a supply deal in place and the value of such a deal doesn't warrant a sticker or patch on the car and driver.  What the supply company would get is the ability to market a direct association of their product/service with a high technology, high popularty sport.  Examples could be IT equipment, brakes, dampers, wheels, computers, tools, clothing etc.  "McLaren uses our products, McLaren is a great winning team, so shouldn't you consider us as well?"

This moves up into what we see, stickers on a car, drivers kit, etc.  Notice ads in magazines featuring the car/driver.  Stickers only do so much, you have to leverage the popularity of link you have made to F1.  You invite guests, clients etc. to races, you advertise your link, you have team personel show up for corporate events etc, you might as well find ways to unite your customers with the sport.. I wouldn't be suprised if many sponsors spend almost as much on advertising their association as they do handing over cash to the teams.

 

2 I would *think* teams approaching sponsors is how it goes.  Only the top notch teams would have companies knocking on their doors.

 

3 I *think* the cheque you are willing to sign determines location of your branding on the car, and that location determines the size of your sticker.

 

4 An association with the sport, a paticular team, a driver. If you are a high tech company it makes sense to associate with a high tech sport. A good portion is business to business. In NASCAR Shell sponsors Penskes #22 car because Roger's fleet of companies uses lots of motor oil.  Sponsor the race team, get the account.  Shell, Mobil1 etc. get a relevant R&D excercise that improves their products and brand value. 

 

The beauty of live sport is very little else draws the complete attention of the viewer.  People want to emulate.

 

5 An American company has a relevant reason to use Formula 1 as a tool to market to the world. Gene Haas is something of an example. He sells machine tools. If his machine tools can build F1 cars they must be pretty good? Put his company sticker on the side of a Ferrari F1 car, install some HAAS CNC machines in the Ferrari factory and that gives his business some clout when he walks into the boardrooms of manufactures.

One thing to consider is I don't think European viewers make up even half the TV numbers anymore.  F1 is a GLOBAL marketing tool.

 

6 That depends and varies from sponsor to sponsor.  I would think they would want a minimum 6:1 return.  Depends what you are in it for.

 

Aren't marketing expenses a tax write off in most countries???

You are going to look at it as what would a $10 million F1 sponsorship deal get me, how will that effect my brands image, and would spending that $10mln on say TV ads get me just as far.  Live sport is such a money making machine though.

 

Hope that helps.


Edited by Nathan, 09 July 2014 - 17:40.


#3 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 09 July 2014 - 17:50

Do you reckon it's a 6:1 gross return or a net? 

 

The size of the sticker thing is funny. I know a guy who worked in F1 marketing for a past-manufacturer team. We were looking at data about which bits of the car are the most visible on screen and particularly vs the rate the sponsors pay. Even with the data saying another spot on the car showed up more, one of their Big Check signers wanted to be in the 'bigger' spot. 



#4 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 09 July 2014 - 18:16

6:1 maybe, it depends I would think on what the company's other marketing efforts are bringing. It would at least have to match up to that. I read somewhere once that a rule of thumb in business is to spend around a tenth of current / anticipated turnover on marketing. I would go more myself, even doing with a 3:1 return. Afterall ratios and percentages are just that, it's the quantities that can be put in them that pays a cheque. Still, I'm not a businessman.
I find it interesting, marketing, especially how it applies in motorsport. Nice thread, though I seem to remember going over this stuff in another thread not so long ago....

#5 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,823 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 09 July 2014 - 18:44

I suspect that simply paying to have your logo on the side or wing of an F1 car doesn't achieve very much commercially. The companies that make F1 sponsorship an effective marketing/promotional tool are those that are prepared to spend as much again on associated TV, billboard and press advertising. The way Vodafone and Santander used Hamilton and Button in their UK ads to persuade people to take out mobile phone contracts or sign-up to credit cards are good examples. Of course it was rather different when F1 sponsorship was one of the few ways cigarette companies could (for a while at least) get their brand logos on TV.

#6 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 09 July 2014 - 18:45

It has always fascinated me how some companies like Phil Morris would pay Ferrari tens of millions of dollars per annum and not even have their logo on the cars instead just having 'subliminal' logos without saying Marlboro itself when previously the logos were as bold as you could imagine.

That might work when tobacco advertising banning was 'fresh' and people still associated that area of the car with Marlboro but how then can PM justify continued sponsorship when that 'era' of the sport is but a distant memory years later?

The actual ROI and projected ROI could be miles apart unless the profits are so vast that a loss could be written off.

Edited by Ferrari_F1_fan_2001, 09 July 2014 - 18:48.


#7 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 6,841 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 09 July 2014 - 18:52

BullHead, I go by the same rule of thumb you mention in my business (based on 'net income')

I think those in the 'biz' refer to what Amphicar desrcibed as 'leveraging'.  I had once heard a typical leverage budget is around 50-80% of the sponsorship cost. So $10mln on sponsoring the team, $5-8mln in advertising that sponsorship.



#8 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 9,272 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 09 July 2014 - 18:56

as tabacco advertising is banned in alot of places then a degraded return on investment is accepted, and smokers are repeat customers too..



#9 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 09 July 2014 - 21:01

You can promote the hell out of Marlboro Ferrari in developing markets where there are fewer ad restrictions. 

 

As an example, apparently at the Monaco GP, outside the track itself there are Marlboro F1 ads pasted all over the place. Because they only enforce the ad ban on the bits of the circuit you see.



#10 Collombin

Collombin
  • Member

  • 8,589 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 09 July 2014 - 21:06

As an example, apparently at the Monaco GP, outside the track itself there are Marlboro F1 ads pasted all over the place. Because they only enforce the ad ban on the bits of the circuit you see.


I remember Roebuck going on a rant about the hypocrisy of that at Kyalami (incidentally the venue where tobacco sponsored cars first appeared in F1).

#11 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 09 July 2014 - 22:14

I always found it weird that the French took the lead on restricting cigarettes and alcohol  :lol:



#12 Garagiste

Garagiste
  • Member

  • 3,799 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 10 July 2014 - 00:38

Yeah, but they tend to enforce their laws in a disctinctly French way. :)

 

Regarding the price to size logo ratio, there's many other things that can influence the price.

I know the man who was the marketing guy for Compaq when they sponsored Williams, and they got a discount on the price for having the logo in blue (to fit with the BMW branding) rather than their corporate red.

The jammy get attended every GP for four years and was always buzzing around the paddock looking for some angle to shift computers.

"Oh, here's a good spot for your interview - just in front of this huge stack of servers with our name all over them".

"Please Frank, not Nick Heidfeld - he's dull as dishwater"

 

Then of course they merged with HP and found themselves sponsoring 2 teams with 2 different brands and it all got a bit complicated.



#13 slideways

slideways
  • Member

  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 10 July 2014 - 05:40

Even with the data saying another spot on the car showed up more, one of their Big Check signers wanted to be in the 'bigger' spot. 

That is not uncommon at all from personal experience... 

 

 

 

Gung ho CEOs with open cheque books getting sucked into the whirlwind of F1 (usually complete virgins never to have seen a race).



#14 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 10 July 2014 - 07:16

Much sponsorship, especially in F1, tends be "synergetic". That is, it's about getting businesses together to do deals with each other, with the team as a facilitator and "sweetener" in the whole thing. In return, discounts are achieved and money ends up int the teams' coffers for it.
Another way of putting it might be, an F1 team is a global business forum, that runs race cars as the complimentary entertainment.

#15 silense

silense
  • Member

  • 77 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 10 July 2014 - 08:09

This is from 2008 but shows what sponsoring opportunities companies have (or had) at Williams.

 

http://www.creativeb...f1/partners.pdf



#16 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 13,177 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 10 July 2014 - 08:56

A lot of these high profile (F1) deals have been engineered by Zak Brown at an agency called JMI. Check out their site if you want to know more; http://www.justmarketing.com

#17 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 10 July 2014 - 10:49

This is from 2008 but shows what sponsoring opportunities companies have (or had) at Williams.

 

http://www.creativeb...f1/partners.pdf

 

Awesome link. Really synthesises things together! 



#18 F1matt

F1matt
  • Member

  • 3,221 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 10 July 2014 - 11:13

I can throw a little light on this for the OP as I knew a guy who managed to sort some sponsorship out for Sauber back in the BMW days, he worked in sales and dealt at board level and at the end of every deal conclusion he used to ask the MD or FD if they were interested in F1, if they said no he wasn't bothered as he had got them signed up for what he set out for, IIRC he managed to get a watch company to sponsor the pit board before they went to a light system, mechanics overalls and a really small patch on the drivers overalls, for making the introduction he got a few thousand dollars off the team and two hard passes which got him entry to every GP.
all I can say is this is a really cheeky guy who could never be offended so he would be the right fit for the paddock, remember him once getting in with Lewis Hamilton by paying for Nick Hamilton a Segway at the Monaco GP.
I can't remember how much the deal was worth but I remember we were all pretty stunned in the office for that price you get no decals on the actual car!

#19 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 10 July 2014 - 15:20

Looking at the financial state of some of the teams, I'd say that at the moment, sponsorship doesn't work.



Advertisement

#20 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 9,272 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 10 July 2014 - 15:44

if you look a little deeper you will see alot of teams are running "house ads"

so last year macca ran with "tooned" on the rear wing - their own cartoon

force india is largely vj's own companies



#21 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,319 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 10 July 2014 - 16:33

Looking at the financial state of some of the teams, I'd say that at the moment, sponsorship doesn't work.

 

Sponsorship works. But just that they cannot find enough of it to run at the operation costs needed. 



#22 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 10 July 2014 - 17:12

Rather what I was alluding to!



#23 oetzi

oetzi
  • Member

  • 6,829 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 11 July 2014 - 08:34

If there was a formula that got you 600% ROI out of F1, there wouldn't be any shortage of takers.



#24 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 11 July 2014 - 08:51

If there was a formula that got you 600% ROI out of F1, there wouldn't be any shortage of takers.

 

Short of the narcotics trade, doing something that has never been done before or doing something with an amazing USP, it's hard to see a 600% return on anything these days. 

 

Well anything that involves selling an actual products. Selling skills or services is a different matter but from what I see, most F1 sponsors are selling products?



#25 oetzi

oetzi
  • Member

  • 6,829 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 11 July 2014 - 09:14

Short of the narcotics trade, doing something that has never been done before or doing something with an amazing USP, it's hard to see a 600% return on anything these days. 

 

Well anything that involves selling an actual products. Selling skills or services is a different matter but from what I see, most F1 sponsors are selling products?

If you're talking about business, I wouldn't disagree. Well, apart from energy drinks maybe.

 

Also, marketing ROI isn't the same as overall business ROI. And may be calculated differently from business to business

 

Anyway, just responding to numbers someone else suggested. Which sound a little optimistic to me.



#26 F1matt

F1matt
  • Member

  • 3,221 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 11 July 2014 - 09:49

I can't see why anyone would want their name linked to F1 either at the track or on the car, its hardly value for money unless its a huge tax write off, with social media it is so easy to direct your products at the right person, the sport is becoming more difficult to watch as more countries switch to pay per view, newspapers are in terminal decline, the  so a back page photo op is insignificant, a tie in with a driver would probably be better to promote your product as it is more personal?



#27 biercemountain

biercemountain
  • Member

  • 1,014 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 11 July 2014 - 14:42

Interesting thread.

 

Regarding the Williams cars this year, I'm surprised we haven't seen an increase in the number of logos considering how well they are doing. Although I like the Martini livery, their car look kind of naked.


Edited by biercemountain, 11 July 2014 - 14:43.


#28 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 11 July 2014 - 15:06

Because marketing budgets are set way in advance. 



#29 Rakaman

Rakaman
  • Member

  • 196 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 11 July 2014 - 15:29

well, in the case of the backmarkers it works like this:

 

1. Get stack of hundred dollar bills

2. flush down toilet

3. ?????

4. repeat as needed. 



#30 biercemountain

biercemountain
  • Member

  • 1,014 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 11 July 2014 - 16:11

well, in the case of the backmarkers it works like this:

 

1. Get stack of hundred dollar bills

2. flush down toilet

3. ?????

4. repeat as needed. 

 

They should load the bills into the car and have them flying out throughout the race. At least they'd get some air time.



#31 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 15 July 2014 - 11:50

Interesting thread.

 

Regarding the Williams cars this year, I'm surprised we haven't seen an increase in the number of logos considering how well they are doing. Although I like the Martini livery, their car look kind of naked.

 

I was thinking the same. Too many white patches on the car.

 

Does Martini - the title sponsor - dictate what colour other sponsors logos should be?



#32 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 15 July 2014 - 12:03

That's not how corporate budgets tend to work. You'd be talking to 2015 sponsors now, not signing ones for 2014.



#33 f1fan1998

f1fan1998
  • Member

  • 293 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 15 July 2014 - 13:34

The first Martini meeting to discuss title sponsorship was around last November.



#34 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 15 July 2014 - 14:10

Was that their first team meeting, in that they'd had an interest and taken an unofficial decision that they wanted to get back into F1? Or the first "hey, I have an idea for you..."



#35 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 17 July 2014 - 08:35

well, in the case of the backmarkers it works like this:

 

1. Get stack of hundred dollar bills

2. flush down toilet

3. ?????

4. repeat as needed. 

 

Seems crazy doesn't it.....all that money (which usually still amounts to millions) and very very little to show for it. I'm surpised more sponsors don't sign a race-by-race agreenment with their teams. We would then probably have back markers etc making it very difficult for front runners to pass, ignoring blue flags etc. 



#36 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 22 October 2014 - 20:29

if you look a little deeper you will see alot of teams are running "house ads"
so last year macca ran with "tooned" on the rear wing - their own cartoon
force india is largely vj's own companies


One has to wonder then is Force India's sponsorship merely a tax break merry go around then?

I disgress.

Back on topic, what is it about F1's business model that makes it so attractive to sponsors while other high profile sports such as boxing cannot attract the same type of sponsors?

#37 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 13,177 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 22 October 2014 - 20:33

F1 has a massive global audience, simple as that really.

#38 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 22 October 2014 - 20:37

yep. global tv exposure for each grand prix - huge. prestige environment for b2b networking second to none.



#39 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,465 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 22 October 2014 - 20:39

Exactly. I think in most European countries (certainly here in the Netherlands) boxing isn't a "high profile sport" at all.



Advertisement

#40 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 22 October 2014 - 20:41

I reckon boxers have a higher profile than the boxing itself.



#41 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,465 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 22 October 2014 - 21:23

The only name of boxers that comes up to me is that of those Klitschko brothers, and that is mainly because of some knowledge of Ukranian politics. I think that is not much at variance with most people here on the European continent - apart from the presumption that I'm more interested in Ukrainian politics than a lot of other people in Europe.



#42 Zoony

Zoony
  • Member

  • 166 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 22 October 2014 - 21:29

I'm sure the time has come for a comprehensive book to be written about how the big sponsorship deals in F1 came about, particularly the tobacco ones now that tobacco is virtually gone from the sport. I'll bet there are some stories to be told!

 

I'd like to see interviews with sponsors and team owners and team staff detailing just how certain car liveries came about. For example I'd love to know who really designed the Marlboro car liveries, and who decided they should change to fluorescent red for motorsport from 1976 until Ferrari.

 

I'd be fascinated to learn the stories behind how various pieces of regional legislation caused some sponsor logos to disappear at some races, but not at others. (This goes on: witness Martini at Sochi.)

 

I believe that some sponsorship deals involved surrendering the entire bodywork surfaces of the cars to a title sponsor, who could then 'sub-contract' areas of the car to other more minor ones. (And possibly even end up making a net monetary gain from sponsoring, I wonder?)

 

I'd love to hear the stories John Hogan could tell...

 

But, back in the real world, I think that tobacco was unique in that it was a legitimate product with a globally-sized advertising budget that it was unable to spend on conventional TV adverts. Whether the zillions the industry injected into F1 was a good thing or a bad thing is a moot point, but we won't see those days again until another industry finds itself in the same position. I think alcohol is probably looking favourite to become that industry at the moment, but even if the TV ads are banned the drink-driving thing might be a show-stopper.



#43 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,465 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 22 October 2014 - 21:49

I'm sure the time has come for a comprehensive book to be written about how the big sponsorship deals in F1 came about, particularly the tobacco ones now that tobacco is virtually gone from the sport. I'll bet there are some stories to be told!

Maybe the best book I've read about F1 is "Bernie's Game" by Terry Lovell. Buy it! (I bought it for £ 0.01 at Amazon)

 

My favourite chapter was about The Big Marlboro Deal.

Marlboro stepped into F1 in 1972, sponsoring BRM, but pretty soon they felt that wasn't a great choice. In the later part of 1973 they decided to leave BRM behind and go for a more promising team, preferably with Emerson Fittipaldi as their star driver. In that way, they also lured Emerson away from John Player(= British American Tobacco), one of their main tobacco rivals, as well!  It became a competition between Brabham (Bernie Ecclestone) and McLaren (Teddy Mayer), where Mayer -investing a lot in a good relationship with Emerson- outfoxed Ecclestone. No mean feat!



#44 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 22 October 2014 - 21:51

 

 

But, back in the real world, I think that tobacco was unique in that it was a legitimate product with a globally-sized advertising budget that it was unable to spend on conventional TV adverts. Whether the zillions the industry injected into F1 was a good thing or a bad thing is a moot point, but we won't see those days again until another industry finds itself in the same position. I think alcohol is probably looking favourite to become that industry at the moment, but even if the TV ads are banned the drink-driving thing might be a show-stopper.

 

Yes, mass consumption alcohol (lager brands) seemed to quickly fade out after tobacco was finally gone. Only the high end stuff (whiskeys) remain. The writing could well be on the wall for alcohol and motor racing. Energy drinks seem to be filling that gap to some extent, but don't seem to fit easy with the prestige image of top level series. Marketeers need to find a high end consumable that doesn't lend well to other mass promotion campaigns. E cigs have been successful in some areas of motorsport, not sure if these brands are yet big enough for the big buck advertising at top level.



#45 rhukkas

rhukkas
  • Member

  • 2,764 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 October 2014 - 21:54

F1 up until the 90s was one of the only truly global sport platforms. 10-20 races in several different countries and continents. it was a great way, in fact the ONLY way for brands to get true worldwide exposure in one simple package. 

 

But now we have the internet. That means companies don't need these big global platforms to get to the audiences they want. They have the  internet which allows them to target their markets in a specific manner that F1 simply can't replicate. As someone has already mentioned F1 becomes a business facilitator. it's not the logo on the cars/bikes. It's the extra bits. Inviting clients to the races etc...



#46 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 22 October 2014 - 21:54

Eddie Jordan's anecdotes in his book are amusing and somewhat intriguing. The deal making with Galagher (B&H), and the 'synergy' deal with Ford and Deutsche Post especially.



#47 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 22 October 2014 - 21:56

F1 up until the 90s was one of the only truly global sport platforms. 10-20 races in several different countries and continents. it was a great way, in fact the ONLY way for brands to get true worldwide exposure in one simple package. 

 

But now we have the internet. That means companies don't need these big global platforms to get to the audiences they want. They have the  internet which allows them to target their markets in a specific manner that F1 simply can't replicate. As someone has already mentioned F1 becomes a business facilitator. it's not the logo on the cars/bikes. It's the extra bits. Inviting clients to the races etc...

 

Surperb point there.


Edited by BullHead, 22 October 2014 - 21:56.


#48 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 7,265 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 October 2014 - 22:26

The thing about advertising - the more places your name appears, the more branding you get.  So having many streams (F1, Magazines, Billboards, TV, Sports Sponsors, etc.) just enhances your brand.



#49 rhukkas

rhukkas
  • Member

  • 2,764 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 October 2014 - 23:37

The thing about advertising - the more places your name appears, the more branding you get. So having many streams (F1, Magazines, Billboards, TV, Sports Sponsors, etc.) just enhances your brand.


That's a bit of a scatter gun approach. A business can now sit down and target someone based on their internet search terms. It makes F1 branding based advertising appear pre historic.

Another point. Motorsport is evolving. It's no longer about JUST racing which on its own is rather dull. Freestyle motocross, Ken Block etc... the youthful brands you would assume would look towards F1 are finding cheaper and more vibrant alternatives.

F1 is a weird entity. It no longer has a clear identity. None of the future stars are relatable for most people (its 99% sons of millionaires or ex f1 drivers).

It still has marketing clout because of its history.... but... it will struggle to compete with growing amount of non boring internet superstars