74 replies to this topic

[oetzi]

Why would the teams be miffed at that deal? They get money and still have their space to sell. It's a win if they're good at their jobs.

You don't hear Man Utd complaining that the Premier League stole away that big wad of Barclays money, do you?

[Craigster]

Why would the teams be miffed at that deal? They get money and still have their space to sell. It's a win if they're good at their jobs.

You don't hear Man Utd complaining that the Premier League stole away that big wad of Barclays money, do you?

[oetzi]

I think the real problem with this stuff is a conceptual one - the teams want to be cutting edge, revenue generating, risk taking, decision making, independent entities that are so much better than the world they don't need to rely on anything but themselves. But they still expect a club mentality.

[skinnylizard]

But that was a PR thing. I don't think Virgin Atlantic was ever on the Brawn or the Marussia/Virgin Racing. Hell I don't even think the latter got discounted flights.

Take out Fernandes and Mallya and they wouldn't be as involved. I think the previous Kingfisher appearances at Benetton were beer, though when it was on the Toyota it may have been the airline.

But as a sector the airlines have not really shown up outside the state affiliated ones (Gulf, Eithad) and owner run (Air Asia, Kingfisher). Emirates have been close a few times, including that McLaren year, but at really really low rates.

Air Canada used to have their GP, Qantas have been in and out. It does make me think it's a cost issue.

Equally the US carriers(and we have arguably the largest aviation market) have stayed out of racing domestically.

Kingfisher & Benetton was indeed Beer back in the i think 96-97 when the airline was non-existent. KF & Toyota was an airline partnership but no discount fare there either as back then KF only flew within India.

[skinnylizard]

I think there's a difference when the CEO of the company is directly involved in what they're sponsoring. I don't think it's good for FI's long term health, for instance, that they have very little 'outside' sponsorship.

precisely. a little wobble here and there in one of the umbrella brands can singe the campaign.

[skinnylizard]

Sure there is a difference, but it doesn't change the fact that two guys who made most of their fortunes from airlines now own two of the midpack teams and are even spending time running them as the team principals.

That isn't something that can just be dismissed as not mattering much when discussing airline sponsorship or airline money coming into F1.

How would British Airways spending £10 million to just slap a logo on a McLaren for example be more important to f1 than two guys who are actively running teams?

VJM made his Billions from his Brewery & Distillery business, in fact the airline has brought him down from the Billionaire mark apparently. Richard Branson made his dosh selling Virgin to EMI.. Tony Fernandes certainly made his fortune on the airline

[ensign14]

Why would the teams be miffed at that deal? They get money and still have their space to sell. It's a win if they're good at their jobs.

You don't hear Man Utd complaining that the Premier League stole away that big wad of Barclays money, do you?

That's cos it's about the only sponsor. You don't have a Premier League bogroll for example. There are lots of complaints in NASCAR that the series stole a number of sponsors. A lot safer if you're Goody's Headache Powder to sponsor NASCAR, where you're guaranteed presence, than Stochastic Racing, who might not make the show or might run 28th every week or choose Steve Wallace as a driver or something.

[oetzi]

That's cos it's about the only sponsor. You don't have a Premier League bogroll for example. There are lots of complaints in NASCAR that the series stole a number of sponsors. A lot safer if you're Goody's Headache Powder to sponsor NASCAR, where you're guaranteed presence, than Stochastic Racing, who might not make the show or might run 28th every week or choose Steve Wallace as a driver or something.

There are others, off the top of my head EA Sports, Lucozade, Nike.

You've explained very clearly ne of the reasons it's a good idea to have partners to a series - partners put off by the risks of sponsoring an individual outfit would be lost for good. This way their money flows in and gets shared.

Central collection and sharing of revenues also helps to keep competition balanced - compare the overall health of the Premier League to the Spanish league, for instance. Or try to imagine who would buy a midfield F1 team without the annual prize money.

[ed24f1]

Virgin didn't involve the airline? What about all the months of press F1 got from the bet Fernandes and Branson had over dressing up as a stewardess?

Virgin Atlantic was on the Brawn at 2009 Japanese GP, so there was a partial involvement.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Well there we go. Official Whatever of F1. Basically all races except Australia, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi which already have airlines, and Monaco.

All in probably 50mil a year for 5 years.

[ed24f1]

Well hopefully the track advertising isn't as obtrusive as the hideous UBS kerbing.

But all in all, nice to see a new sponsorship deal for F1.

[showtime]

Well there we go. Official Whatever of F1. Basically all races except Australia, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi which already have airlines, and Monaco.

All in probably 50mil a year for 5 years.

Australia has Rolex, not an airline anymore.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Rolex is stumping up to sponsor a GP? That's a slightly odd one. Maybe Qantas is still taking some bridges or something and that's why Emirates are skipping that weekend. It's definitely one of their routes.

Edited by Ross Stonefeld, 05 February 2013 - 21:01.

[F1ultimate]

Emirates airlines are an absolute charge to be the world's best airline. Their business and first class are second to none and sponsoring F1 will just give that extra exposure to get people to consider emirates even for flights that are not to the middle east.

[ed24f1]

Rolex is stumping up to sponsor a GP? That's a slightly odd one. Maybe Qantas is still taking some bridges or something and that's why Emirates are skipping that weekend. It's definitely one of their routes.

Qantas are still a major sponsor of the event, just not the title sponsor. I'd be very surprised if there wasn't Qantas adverts around the track, just as there were when Transurban, Foster's and ING were title sponsors. I'm not surprised that Qantas have dropped back, you could tell from looking at their presence in 2012 compared to 2010 and 2011 that they were putting much less money in, and the announcement of their title sponsorship was later and later. So I'd say that the Australian Grand Prix Corporation accepted a reduced rate just to have the prestige of a title sponsor - something they have had for every year in Melbourne.

Having said that, it is ironic, as Qantas and Emirates have just signed a new collaboration deal.

I'd say Rolex's deal might be a one-off just to bring attention to their new deal, but we'll have to wait and see. With - as it stands - Santander dropping out of GP title rights for 2013, they might be encouraged to sponsor some other big name events like the British GP.

[Red17]

Rolex too has become the official watch (or was it timekeeper) of Formula 1. So it's not like they need a titular Grand Prix, tho I could see them trying to sponsor Monaco just show it off next to Lemans and Daytona where they already have exposure deals.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I noticed Santander wasn't listed at any of the races. They often update the schedule a bit late but surely the Santander stuff was locked in early if it was going to be there at all? Like I think we all know Brazil will be Petrobas, but it's not inked in seemingly. Likewise ENI at Hungary.

[Jhope]

One of the main reasons why Airlines refuse to get in to any kind of long term sponsorship deal with teams, and/or FOM is simply down to money. The annual profit forecast for the airline industry in 2012 was USD4.1 billion.

Now think of how many airlines there are globally, and look at how many are actually successful enterprises. Not many. Most (American Airlines, Air Canada, Delta, Air France/KLM for example) are fighting tooth and nail to save pennies, as the cost of maintaining aircraft increases annually due to fuel, parts and labour cost.

Of that USD4.1 billion profit pool, USD750 million went to Middle Eastern carriers such as Qatar and Emirates, Etihad and Royal Jordanian. That's USD3.35 billion to share amongst all other carriers (240 international carriers according to IATA), plus several destination/charter carriers).

Seems only logical, that if a carrier is going to sponsor a team, it's going to come out of the Persion Gulf region.

[BRG]

It was a pity they couldn't get Ryanair as sponsor. O'Leary's money gouging business tactics would have sat so well next to Bernie's.

[discover23]

Some very reliable sources tell me that that this deal was already signed .
The airline compnany is now going through all of the details of the benefits and perks that this deal will bring them.

[Ross Stonefeld]

What, Ryanair?

[BRG]

What, Ryanair?

Nah, can't be Ryanair, he mentioned benefits and perks. Ryanair don't do either. At least, not for their customers.

[discover23]

Its been in the news since Feb 5
http://mobile.reuter...130205?irpc=932

[Ross Stonefeld]

Your very reliable sources could have just been this thread

[discover23]

I know - I am lazy, too busy at work - (I see your post now from that day). I read the title and was intrigued about it and asked someone, who I know has some insight, when I ran into him last night. He told me this was already a done deal.

Edited by discover23, 21 February 2013 - 16:48.