Those 'vintage' liveries...

[Onch]

Am I the only one thinking that Lotus-Renault and Williams actually get sponsorship money from Imperial Tobacco and British American Tobacco in exchange for their suggestive liveries?
I just can't see the teams painting their cars this way 'for the beauty of it'.

[agip]

I do see the teams painting their cars that 'for the beauty of it'.

And if they get money from them, who cares? Marlboro still gives a lot of money to Ferrari.

[n_anirudh]

I do remember Willaims going against tobacco branding in mid 2000's and even had NiquitinQ as a sponsor...doubt if Frank would go back to that...

group lotus borrowed the idea of running JPS style livery from tony fernandes??

doubt if any of the companies pay the teams

[manchild]

Ferrari isn't just "getting money" from Marlboro. They are official sponsor, full team name is Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro. The reason why they add white to their red and try to suggest design of pack of Marlboro is because they have to, it's the part of the deal.

When Lotus Renault and Williams Cosworth become Lotus Renault JPS and Williams Cosworth Rothmans, only than there will be a reason for finger pointing.

[Onch]

Well to put things straight, I don't have any problem with tobacco advertising. I have been watching F1 since as far as I can remember and I have never felt the urge to smoke... Actually I find this tobacco ban in F1 completely stupid but that is another story.

Agree that these are not links like at Ferrari where Marlboro is part of the team name. But that does not mean that there is no money involved.

It is true that Lotus Renault in the 80's were black and gold, so maybe it is only good old nostalgia marketing.
For Williams though why not choose the yellow/blue of the 80's / early 90's or white and green from the 1st champonship winning car (also with Corsworth)?

So no complaining here, just wondering whether they are bending the Tobacco ban...

[gridwalker]

Ferrari isn't just "getting money" from Marlboro. They are official sponsor, full team name is Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro. The reason why they add white to their red and try to suggest design of pack of Marlboro is because they have to, it's the part of the deal.

When Lotus Renault and Williams Cosworth become Lotus Renault JPS and Williams Cosworth Rothmans, only than there will be a reason for finger pointing.

Phillip Morris Tobacco actually owns a lease on the rights to the entire Ferrari livery : they pay a flat fee for the rights, then additional companies that wish to sponsor Ferrari have to pay Phillip Morris for the space on the car.

This gives Marlboro a nice bit of leverage over how the livery is displayed.

[Racewatcher]

I don't see a problem here, as long as clarity is maintained. If they want to run older style liveries for nostalgic reasons, fine. But if tobacco companies are paying them to do it, just say so. The only real barriers to that are countries like Canada, where tobacco advertising is banned.

[horse]

I have been watching F1 since as far as I can remember and I have never felt the urge to smoke...

If the advertising were not encouraging people to smoke then what is the point of advertising?

The only real barriers to that are countries like Canada, where tobacco advertising is banned.

And every EU country.

In the UK, plans are afoot to remove all decoration from tobacco packaging and sell them from under the counter. Smoking is a killer and people should not be encouraged to smoke through advertising.

Regarding the liveries I would say they are walking a fine line, as most F1 liveries are associated with a sponsor or product. This was certainly the case for the JPS and Rothmans liveries and, as such, are associated to those cars. As I've said before, these liveries will always be referred to by those product names and are therefore advertising those products.

[Avto]

I don't see a problem here, as long as clarity is maintained. If they want to run older style liveries for nostalgic reasons, fine. But if tobacco companies are paying them to do it, just say so. The only real barriers to that are countries like Canada, where tobacco advertising is banned.

I'm pretty sure tobacco advertising is banned in EU.

[Jon]

If the advertising were not encouraging people to smoke then what is the point of advertising?

Advertising is not about convincing or encouraging you to start smoking/eating/whatever. Advertising is about brand awareness, retention, differentiation, etc. You (meaning human beings) are more likely to buy a brand you "know" over a brand you don't. This works all the way from the subconscious level all the way to the conscious, so even if you only "know" the brand through advertisements, it is going to affect your choices.

For example, let's say you decide to start smoking today, and don't know anyone who does. Hmmm...so, how are you going to decide which brand to buy? Ask random strangers? Or, maybe you remember that funny/innovative/edgy/insert_your_preferred_adjective_here advertisement from brand X. - "I might as well buy that one, if I don't like it I can buy a different pack next time." - you tell yourself. Maybe you do, maybe you don't. But the fact is that brand X got an extra sell. And maybe, just maybe, you stick with them till the cancer kicks in.

[richard_leeds]

Advertising does increase consumption as well as brand choice, especially when it hits a lifestyle market and becomes the cool thing to do.

[Giblet]

It's not just money from tobacco, it's how you relate to your fans. If don't care about smoking either way, you probably like the pretty cars with paintjobs that look like packs of cigs. It's easy to look at a black and gold car and not think about lungs and cancer and stuff.

If you are against big tobacco and everything it stands for, then it might be hard to align yourself with a team that races off of money attained through slowly killing people.

If you don't have any tobacco ties, you have a more complete audience base than if you do.

Be careful folks, last time we had this discussion it got a little crazy and I think locked. If it starts to look the same, we'll have to do the same.

[Terrible3]

I know I cant speak for everyone here and I may be a bit close minded but I think the ban on tobacco sponsorship is a load of BS. I grew up watching MS drive that red car home with the massive tobacco add on the side and I was never once inclined to light one up. I get the feeling that legislation to ban tobacco sponsorship was just some lame politicking by someone trying to pass a "feel good" law. In Canada (Ontario) for example now all the smokes have to be hidden inside cabinets at retail stores so they are, " out of sight and out of mind." What a crock of crap, just because I cant see the boxes of smokes does not mean I don't know that they are there. I really think the tabacco industry is just a scapegoat for any lazy politician to turn to when their ratings fall. I have no problems with tabacco footing the bill for race teams, it would be a massive help to some series.... cough..... ALMS..... cough. Anyways I have never smoked a day in my live and I still think beating up on those who do is pointless.

[Terrible3]

If you are against big tobacco and everything it stands for, then it might be hard to align yourself with a team that races off of money attained through slowly killing people.

For me at the end of the day these people make a choice to smoke KNOWING the hazards to their health. They will smoke regardless of the negative effect on their heath and the price of a pack. To that I have so say why not use that money to fund a race team? Is it any different from a petrol company sponsoring a car? They do damage too right? The more money in the sport the more jobs are available... awesome for someone in engineering like myself....

[mep]

Ferrari isn't just "getting money" from Marlboro. They are official sponsor, full team name is Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro. The reason why they add white to their red and try to suggest design of pack of Marlboro is because they have to, it's the part of the deal.

True.
Last year I was on Monaco Gp and there where some Ferrari/Marlboro stands selling merchandising articles. I took a photo of it but some guy immediately came and forced me to delete the photo.

However I don't care when they have a tobacco logo on their car. Actually I like that more than those assurances, banks, slave trader companies or other "criminal institutes" with their slippery hypocritical images which we have now. Those companies are bad for the sport.
The malboro man at least has the more desirable image and comes closer to a real person who has human errors. Well when you sit in front of a camp fire every night do you really have to care about smoking cigarettes?