22 replies to this topic

[The Fazz]

I was just wondering. What does the ban on tobacco sponsorship mean in 2006? I can't see how the FIA or anybody can police money coming from tobacco companies? As such, the tobacco ban may not mean the complete loss of tobacco revenue.

Would the mere removal of the tobacco branding as we see now be legal post 2006?

If the Lucky-Strike BAR livery is replaced by an nationalistic Japanese flag (red bullseye on white backgrounds) coloured Honda team be legal?

Is Marlboro preparing to for the tobacco ban by introducing more whites on the Ferrari?

The list is endless... I'd like to know what you guys think.

[BRG]

Why would any company (tobacco or otherwise) give major sponsorship money to an F1 team if they cannot display their name and logo, or use the connection in their marketing?

Come 2006, the tobacco companies will be spending their sponsorship money on golf or waterpolo or boules or something - they have no special loyalty to motorsport and will walk away without a backward glance once they can nio longer use it to sell their products. For example, BAT have already agreed their plans to dispose of BAR to Prodrive in 2005.

[The Fazz]

BRG - good question... why would they stay?

They may stay because tobacco companies are known to be very creative. I remember well those tobacco billboards (and magazine adverts) in England which hardly mentioned anything about the ciggy brand... but the association of certain colours and themes were enough for them to splash their money all over town.

What I am suggesting here is a similar and very subtle method of evading the ban. My example of the Lucky Strike livery: it has a nice red circle on a white background. Repaint it slightly and voila - the flag of the rising sun. If Honda takes over the team from BAT, who's to say that they can't run the colours of the rising sun? But the association and imagery of Lucky Strike will still remain.

Same thing with Ferrari: if enough whites and day glo red is created... it seems that is the direction things are going at the moment.

[The First MH]

I've often wondered the same thing. What would stop BAR/BAT, say, from branding a huge red ribbon on the car, and doing a huge funding drive - all the while racking in sponsorship money from BAT - to support say AIDS research/funding. There are subtle ways for viewers to find out that this 'funding drive' is coming from BAT, and it certainly wouldn't do their 'image' any harm having people know that they're actually doing something good in the world. And BAT could of course still still inadvertantly advertize their company - having people find out that the funding drive is sponsored by BAT. The drivers could go on TV talk shows - radio, TV etc. - to discuss how to help donate money for AIDS research and hospitals in countries that really need it and where to donate money for the funding drive. At the end of the year, they could donate it to places that could really use the money. Think of the PR possibilities - with those huge BAT signs everywhere!

I know it sounds a little far fetched to have a tobacco company sponsor an F1 team purely so that it can raise money for AIDS research, but my question is really what would stop BAR/BAT from doing this? It would keep F1 rolling in tobacco money, and still manage to advertize, all the while giving an image of doing something worthwhile/productive and good for society.

Not that I think BAT/BAR, Marlborough, Mild Seven, and B&H are up to the task.... But the possibilities are endless, funding drives for street kids, women's shelters, environmental disasters, etc...

[BRG]

There is a big difference between using the "East", "Bitten Heroes" or Marlboro-colours-only tactic for certain races, whilst having the full livery again a couple of weeks later, and not having your name and logo on display at all, all through the year.

I suspect that the board and shareholders of Phillip Morris, B & H etc would soon be questioning whether this was good use of company money. These are commercial concerns, who are in motorsport sponsorship to promote their brand and to sell more cigarettes. The moment that they are contrained from doing that, they will move their marketing budgets to somewhere else where they can get press and TV coverage. And I doubt if the FIA or the EC and its member countries, would let them get away with a blatant ploy like that. IIRC, the French already got pretty heavy with Williams over displaying tobacco sponsorship.

[The First MH]

Isn't sponsorship tied in with tax rebates?

Might be reason enough sometimes.

[aportinga]

Hey folks... Tobacco companies own a ton of other international products which CAN be advertised.

Phillip Morris doesn't ONLY make smokes

[The Fazz]

BRG - if the ban is for all of the EU (and covers TV coverage) do you think these companies would settle for waterpolo or some sport which is not watched by Europeans? They can't go very long ignoring one of their biggest market. Would they? How would they tackle the EU?

[The Fazz]

Originally posted by aportinga
Hey folks... Tobacco companies own a ton of other international products which CAN be advertised.

Phillip Morris doesn't ONLY make smokes

You are right. Here in Malaysia where actual ciggy adverts are banned, we have "Marlboro Challenge Trophy" (an adventure tour company), "Mild Seven Travel" (another tour company), "Camel Adventure" (cross country rally/adventure and lifestyle accessories), "Dunhill Fashion"... and loads others. So instead of selling ciggies, they sell lifestyle.... and secretly the cigarette is part of that lifestyle... you smoke a Marlboro and you're and action kind of guy. You smoke Dunhill, then you are a classy kind of person etc.

[BRG]

Originally posted by The Fazz
They can't go very long ignoring one of their biggest market.

It doesn't look like they are going to have any option. The EC ban is going to come in (and not just on motorsport) and I doubt if it will permit the sort of back-door advertising that is being suggested here.

Doubtless, by 2006, the tobacco industry will be targetting the less developed countries even harder than it does now. There's all those Chinese and Indians for instance, far more smokers, potential smokers and ex-smokers than Europe and the US put together. Not to mention Africa and S. America. Smoking is in decline in the developed world, so it would not really make sense to spend lots of money on a shrinking market. It would be far better business to sponsor the Asian Games, or the Africa (Football) Cup or the Copa Americana (Football) or such like. If those regions or countries haven't also put restrictions on tobacco advertising by 2006, that is.

[aportinga]

Phillip Morris also owns Kraft Foods and Miller Brewing Company for example.

[Scudetto]

Originally posted by aportinga
Phillip Morris also owns Kraft Foods and Miller Brewing Company for example.

Ho no. Don't try and put "Lite" or "MGD" on the side of a Ferrari! How awful would that be? I can just imagine a cadre of Ferrari mechanics walking around the Indy paddock yelling "show us your t1ts" in Italian. Not pretty.

[aportinga]

Maybe a pair of nice tits could change your mind no?

[Scudetto]

Originally posted by aportinga
Maybe a pair of nice tits could change your mind no?

I might be swayed, but they'd have to be REALLY nice.

[Arioch]

Originally posted by aportinga
Phillip Morris also owns Kraft Foods and Miller Brewing Company for example.

hate to correct you like this, but phillip morris just sold miller brewing to south american brewers to become the second largest brewer in the world.

miller will still be made here in milwaukee, and most of the staff will stay, but it will be owned by SAB in a stock deal worth something like 3.1billion us$.

-dave (native milwaukeean)

[The First MH]

SAB is a South African Brewery, not a South American one. And they make Shitty beer, no matter what South Africans will tell you.

[dynamite7]

stupid post below, may be incorrect

In Australia the tobacco ban for V8 supercars was for 1996, however one of the tobacco companies still continued Peter Jackson (which I think is a Phillp Morris brand, so this means they might do the same thing in F1) they instead wrote Pack Leaders to look like Peter Jackson and had that for the WHOLE 96 season, with the new SBR cars still painted in the same Peter Jackson colours from the 1995 GSR.

[lustigson]

Doesn't Philip Morris/Marlboro make jeans and stuff too? They could advertise that on the cars... and still have 'Marlboro' all over the Ferrari.

[The Fazz]

Another thing just occurred to me (bright sparks don't occur that often, so please indulge me)... does the EU ban on ciggy advert affect what is being televised no matter where the event is being televised from? If Marlboro decides to sponsor the Copa America... would it mean that none of the EU nations can watch any of the telecast?

[Gemini]

Those who are working on anti-tobacco legislation are not so stupid to ban cigarrette brand advertising and to let them advertise another product with identical or very similar branding. Big Tobacco used that trick before, some goverments noticed and responded. I think those extensions are already in force in some markets. That's why for example Camel clothing brand was forced to change their name to Camel Active and change their logo substancially..

Big Tobacco can still try to put their brands into daylight in non-european races, but this would cause some difficulties in using whole team image in marketing campaigns (media) in Europe. That in turn would cause negative reaction of other non-tobacco sponsors who would like to exercice full advantage of their sponsorship on the same car...

My conclusion. Tobacco will be history...

[BRG]

Originally posted by The Fazz
does the EU ban on ciggy advert affect what is being televised no matter where the event is being televised from?

That would be almost impossible to police. The UK's ban on tobacco advertising on TV has been in force for many years, but it has only been applied to events taking place within the UK. Whether the same wil apply to the EU's ban remains to be seen. But didn't the French try to apply their tobacco ban to events outside France but shown on television in France - there was a row over Williams and Rothmans IIRC. So how the EC will play it is anyone's guess!

[aportinga]

Arioch...

I could have sworn that was Bud but I checked and ur right ...

SAB Buys Miller

[Arioch]

well, that's what i get for trying to get a reply in right before i leave work.... yes, SAB is south african brewery, not south american... i don't know why i didn't remember that. i drove right by the brewery 2 days ago. oh well.

as a former smoker, i couldn't care less personally if there's ciggy advertising on cars. maybe it's my near hatred of all adveritsing in general, but most of the time, i don't even notice the advertisers anyways. i've never bought a tag watch because i saw it on the side of a mclaren, or lucky strike smokes since it's on the side of the bar... and the reason i buy redbull isn't because it was plastered all over the saubers and arows last year. maybe i'm not alone in this, i hope everyone else is free-willed enough to see through that. they probably aren't... at least in this area where nascar is king and everyone has to have their monte carlo ss like their favorite redneck racer... anyways i'm rambling now. i'm going to go off and do something apathetic.

-dave