Midfield Sponsorship

[Conceptual]

So, Philips signs a big deal with Williams because they have seen positive growth due to the sponsorship.

That makes you wonder. What is better to sponsor, a run-away leader, or a hotly contested mid-packer?

My TV watching experience tells me that the cameras are fixed on the action. There are races this season that have gone minutes at a clip between showing the leader.

If the sponsors want air-time, the mid-packers are their best bet.

What is the consensus on this?

[roost89]

It depends on what the sponsor is after I think.
If it's prestige, then I think it's best to go for a leader, say McLaren, Ferrari or BMW(soon anyway).

However if it's awareness of their product or brand, then air-time is what they're after. So it'd be a midfield attacking car.
I think there's more to it than that though

I was thinking of a similar question today. "How many of us use a product or brand that's sponsoring F1?" alas, that's possibly for another thread

[mx_tifoso]

For the best 'bang for the buck' I would say that a mid-field team is a better option, since they provide a lot of action during races (tv exposure) and will most likely demand less money in sponsorship fees.

[modbaraban]

In addition to F1 TV-coverage sposors of winning teams get exposure in the TV-news, press etc. Ask a bunch of non-F1 fans if the they know who sponsors Williams.

[donskar]

It depends on what the sponsor is after I think.
If it's prestige, then I think it's best to go for a leader, say McLaren, Ferrari or BMW(soon anyway).

However if it's awareness of their product or brand, then air-time is what they're after. So it'd be a midfield attacking car.
I think there's more to it than that though

I was thinking of a similar question today. "How many of us use a product or brand that's sponsoring F1?" alas, that's possibly for another thread

Answering a question someone should ask: "Which sport's fans are most loyal to that sport's sponsors?" NASCAR.

[donskar]

For the best 'bang for the buck' I would say that a mid-field team is a better option, since they provide a lot of action during races (tv exposure) and will most likely demand less money in sponsorship fees.

Research we did at Compaq before deciding to go with Willimas indicated that paying more for a top team was worth it.

There are a lot of factors we considered: will the team be around for the life of the contract? (see Aguri, and all the Jordan permutations among many others).

Do we want to be associated with the team's other sponsors? (Johnny Walker MIGHT give pause to certain potential sponsors).

Is the team already sponsored by a competing company? McLaren + Sun and Williams + Lenovo could rule out another computer company sponsor.

Does the team have a high (positive) profile? Will they be featured on magazine covers and within the magazines? Will we/what will we gain by association: McLaren WAS ultra-safe here, but we would have backed away after StepneyGate; Ferrari was a bullet-proof choice, but there wasn't any room for a computer sponsor; Toyota today has great brand value, but what do they offer a high-tech sponsor?

Will the team make promotional appearances for us?

Is there synergy with the team's existing sponsors (imagine the joint marketing possible if one team was sponsored by both McDonalds and Coca-Cola.

[timbo]

Williams PR-management made a good use of their Eurosport series. Although performance of Williams today is not so good they receive a good amount of coveredge on TV.

[shotzski]

I've read from somewhere that Mclaren do not only money in their sponsorship deals, but as well as the know how or technological advancements of their sponsors (eg: BAE, Sun, CA). Do other teams do the same thing?

Speaking of sponsorship, what do you thing the reason behind Intel sponsoring both BMW and Toyota? Is it beneficial to do so? And aren't there supposed to be an agreement of exclusivity? Thanks!

[axle]

Intel will have been behind both team's supercomputers. So in return, depending on the reduced cost of the SC, the teams run a sponsors logo...I'm guessing Albert 2 was free

[Conceptual]

I've read from somewhere that Mclaren do not only money in their sponsorship deals, but as well as the know how or technological advancements of their sponsors (eg: BAE, Sun, CA). Do other teams do the same thing?

Speaking of sponsorship, what do you thing the reason behind Intel sponsoring both BMW and Toyota? Is it beneficial to do so? And aren't there supposed to be an agreement of exclusivity? Thanks!

With 10 teams, and 2 major chip manufacturers, Im sure that they all use Intel or AMD. I guess it just comes down to how much the teams had to pay for them...

And, by the looks of what AMD/ATI are doing, there is a project underway to use the ATI 4870x2 vid-cards to do the CFD computations, so we may well see Video Card manufacturers as sponsors over Chip makers...

[pgj]

There is also the 'corporate vehicle' aspect. A big part of the sponsorship deal is related corporate entertainment and how well the team is able to provide corporate value for money. If any of us got the opportunity to spend a Saturday in the garage of an F1 team, it would not really matter if it was a midfield team or one of the championship contenders. That kind of corporate entertainment is still very rare and carries a great deal of prestige.