Famous names "returning" to F1

[noname]

if you do something be brave enough to sign it with your own name and take whole credits if it would be success, or blame if you'd screw it up.

in my opinion hiding behind famous names from the past is clear indication of the very small balls.

[WhiteBlue]

I'll cheer for Legally Lotus on the day that I buy a fake Rolex and wear it with pride...

This sounds a bit like comparing apples with bananas. One is simply an illegal rip off, the other is a risky branding strategy that may or may not be ill advised. I still do not see what is cynical about it.

[gridwalker]

I'll cheer for Legally Lotus on the day that I buy a fake Rolex and wear it with pride...

This sounds a bit like comparing apples with bananas. One is simply an illegal rip off, the other is a risky branding strategy that may or may not be ill advised. I still do not see what is cynical about it.

cyn·i·cal (sĭn'ĭ-kəl)

adj.

1. Believing or showing the belief that people are motivated chiefly by base or selfish concerns; skeptical of the motives of others: a cynical dismissal of the politician's promise to reform the campaign finance system.
2. Selfishly or callously calculating: showed a cynical disregard for the safety of his troops in his efforts to advance his reputation.
3. Negative or pessimistic, as from world-weariness: a cynical view of the average voter's intelligence.
4. Expressing jaded or scornful skepticism or negativity: cynical laughter.

I'm using the 2nd definition : Selfishly or callously calculating

Firstly, the lure of a famous name returning to F1 is likely to vastly increase their chance of selection, simply because of the media coverage this would provoke.
Secondly, the lure of being associated with a famous name would increase their prospects of securing sponsorship deals.
Thirdly, through the use of a famous name, the parent company are risking less damage to their own personal brand in the event of failure, as Joe Public won't generally think "Oh, Lotus in 2010, that was actually Litespeed, wasn't it?" ...

It's all about the fact that this rebranding is aimed at increasing their prospects whilst minimising the risk to their own company's reputation : that sounds pretty cynical to me.

[Conceptual]

Does it really matter what name is on the car?

I mean, who cares really? We all know that 100% of F1's decision making is in line with money, so does it really bother you?

If ANYONE expects a startup F1 team, under ANY name, to be WCC competition I would suggest that they get their brains examined.

It does not matter what name these teams pick, or buy, what matters is what they do on track after putting the people and equipment together to design/build a car.

I know that customer cars are not legal currently, but is there anything stopping an established team to sub-contract building parts? I mean, if Campos designs their car, can they pay BMW to actually do the carbon layup?

With the teams having redudnant workers in this cost capping time, would it not be better for those workers to stay where they are, and have their salaries come from contracted work?

[WhiteBlue]

"Selfishly or callously calculating" were the criteria used to support the claim that re branding is cynical.

Let us investigate that in greater detail:

We are dealing with a business that intends to pick up a sporting competition in the highest catagory of motorsport with a switch to a budget probably 20 times what they currently have.

They are making a bold move there by any means. If they fail their names will suffer like Walkinshaw or Prost's did when they went bust. It doesn't matter what brand they use imo. Prost used his own name and Walkingshaw Arrows. Both finished their reputation as good business men. By using a brand with high recognition you simply up the stakes. If you fail, the shame is even bigger.

What is being selfish and callous about it? If a new team would disregard the greater good of F1 as a whole and the welfare of other stake holders by re using a famous brand name I would agree with the label. As it stands I believ the word cynical is misplaced.

[KiwiF1]

another new entry.
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_ ... t_id=38123

I've already lost count how many teams has submitted an entry for next year. =S

Very funny...

Pete Aron is the "screen name" of James Garner in the movie Grand Prix. Yamura is the "screen name" of Honda, as Nino Barlini is a fake name for Lorenzo Baldini.

I remember Aron going into the pool at Monaco in the movie... BTW, he raced a few races after that film.

The legendary brown overalls of Ferrari-Manetta are as fictional as the Jordan-BRM team. Manetta was the team director for Ferrari in the movie, and Jordan-BRM was the team of Scott Stoddard (maybe inspired by Jim Clark, who also appears in the movie).

Gosh! thank you! That explains alot, i was a bit confused there.

[bjpower]

"Selfishly or callously calculating" were the criteria used to support the claim that re branding is cynical.

Let us investigate that in greater detail:

We are dealing with a business that intends to pick up a sporting competition in the highest catagory of motorsport with a switch to a budget probably 20 times what they currently have.

They are making a bold move there by any means. If they fail their names will suffer like Walkinshaw or Prost's did when they went bust. It doesn't matter what brand they use imo. Prost used his own name and Walkingshaw Arrows. Both finished their reputation as good business men. By using a brand with high recognition you simply up the stakes. If you fail, the shame is even bigger.

What is being selfish and callous about it? If a new team would disregard the greater good of F1 as a whole and the welfare of other stake holders by re using a famous brand name I would agree with the label. As it stands I believ the word cynical is misplaced.

Thats from a business view while from a sport view its completely wrong.
while F1 is a business it is also a sport.

the sport must have honor and dignity. I cant see how any team can hold there head up high when they have robbed the name of there team from someone else

as for the greater good of F1 its completely wrong and will give an image of cheep counterfeit cars.
which is what they are. pretending to be something they are not.

[gridwalker]

Does it really matter what name is on the car?

I mean, who cares really?

This is exactly what I am trying to ascertain : who actually cares ...

Personally, I place a great deal of value on history & can't help but feel that this is abusing the reputation built up by possibly the most influential designer ever to have been involved in F1 : Colin Chapman.

Lotus kept going after Chapman's demise, but never regained it's former glory ... the team suffered a slow death (of the sort that I hope Williams can avoid), eventually merging with the short-lived Pacific team before vanishing entirely.

To simply buy up the name of Lotus and slap it on a team that has virtually nothing to do with the original is a travesty in my eyes. We are talking about the team that introduced monocoque chassis and ground effects into the sport, taking their designs across to the US and proving their mettle by becoming the first rear-engined car to win the Indy 500!

We aren't talking about just ANY team, but a legendary team : the team that introduced the design features that have molded the basic parameters of almost every top level single seat open wheeled racer since ...

If you honestly believe that standing on the shoulders of giants is a fair way to get ahead then that is your prerogative, but I'm disgusted by the notion.

[DaveKillens]

In this day and age, any organization goes to a lot of trouble and expense to copyright and protect their name. It is for this very reason we now see, where people seek to ride on the back of a name recognizable to the public. I can understand the business reason for such a decision, but in the end, it's pretty low and pretty cheap.
What's interesting to me is the timing, how all of a sudden in just a few weeks all these famous names are popping up. Is it a coincidence, or is there more behind it? My belief is that someone is encouraging such behavior. It could be Max, it could be Bernie, but these teams are under the impression that by using a famous name, it enhances their prospects in gaining admittance to Formula One.
And all this leads up to my worse-case scenario, where next year we will not see Ferrari or McLaren, but instead replaced by Lotus, Lola, Brabahm, March, and who knows what else.

[gridwalker]

In this day and age, any organization goes to a lot of trouble and expense to copyright and protect their name. It is for this very reason we now see, where people seek to ride on the back of a name recognizable to the public. I can understand the business reason for such a decision, but in the end, it's pretty low and pretty cheap.
What's interesting to me is the timing, how all of a sudden in just a few weeks all these famous names are popping up. Is it a coincidence, or is there more behind it? My belief is that someone is encouraging such behavior. It could be Max, it could be Bernie, but these teams are under the impression that by using a famous name, it enhances their prospects in gaining admittance to Formula One.
And all this leads up to my worse-case scenario, where next year we will not see Ferrari or McLaren, but instead replaced by Lotus, Lola, Brabahm, March, and who knows what else.

I'm glad you picked up on this : this was one of the topics that I hoped people would think about ...

The fact that there are so many coming in one go makes me think that Max and Bernie are trying to cover their asses if the FOTA teams don't fall into line ... if all of the famous names pull out, it won't do their bottom line any favours to have a bunch of nobodies racing each other at "the pinnacle of motorsport", so I believe that entrants are being encouraged to use names that evoke the history of F1, even if those entrants have absolutely nothing to do with the original teams that bore those names.

I also find it interesting that 2 of those teams (Brabham and March) were previously owned by Bernie and Max ...

[Mitsuhirato]

Regarding Lotus, what is there any registered name under that team? I mean the problem is that the name "Lotus" could be too generic and may be reused by whoever would like.

Anyway, the charade would be complete with someone submitting an entry under Tyrrell, while the successor in line (Brawn) is still competing.

[donskar]

Interesting: legally, and from a pure bottom-line view, WB is right. Morally, Dave is correct (IMO).

I lean toward the moral versus legal side. I could legally change my name to that of (insert whatever movie star is currently popular). Legally, I'd be OK, but I would still be fat and ugly.

[WhiteBlue]

.... I cant see how any team can hold there head up high when they have robbed the name of there team from someone else.....

We have been down that road allready. If the brand is legally aquired there is no such thing as robbery. And regarding sporting behavior how can a team like Ferrari hold their head high after they manipulated the championship by a veto which they accepted as a bribe?

[WhiteBlue]

.... My belief is that someone is encouraging such behavior. It could be Max, it could be Bernie, but these teams are under the impression that by using a famous name, it enhances their prospects in gaining admittance to Formula One....

I would bet on it that Bernie is behind that scheme. He criticised Brawn for their branding because Honda would have looked much better in his portfolio.

For the FIA I would think they don't care. Max pursues his issues like green F1, new teams and safety. jm2ct

[gcdugas]

Brabham, Lotus, March, Lola.... Max is going through the last throes of nostalgic premature senility, "rumored" to be from Syphilis he caught in a dungeon somewhere. Pitpass has scooped everyone, with another exclusive story about a potent and formidable new entry. Clicky