F1technical.net

See the Ferrari logo in the top left triangular shape, with the other white sided triangle to the bottom making a sort of square?

This was made in favour of the "subliminal advertising" they had a couple of years back.
Phillip Morris pay for this.

bhallg2k wrote:

myurr wrote:

bhallg2k wrote:Ferrari weathered the loss of Vodafone pretty well, and I imagine Santander's involvement with the team is roughly similar.

Times were different back then though. When was that? 2005/6ish off the top of my head, so happy to be corrected.

Sponsorship money was easier to come by back then and the core groups finances were a little healthier. The Vodafone deal was also effectively just buying space off Marlborough, so the tobacco money would have covered any shortfall.

It's not going to cause Ferrari any real problems but it would be a set back.

Vodafone left Ferrari at the end of 2006. They won both titles in 2007 and the Constructors' Championship in 2008, both years without a direct replacement sponsorship. In any case, Philip Morris is still the title sponsor of the team until at least 2016, even if there's no title.

Interesting timing: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100328

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:See the Ferrari logo in the top left triangular shape, with the other white sided triangle to the bottom making a sort of square?

This was made in favour of the "subliminal advertising" they had a couple of years back.
Phillip Morris pay for this.

That's great advertising.

I'd like the tobacco advertising back in F1 simply because most of the tobacco related liveries were incredible to look at.

myurr wrote: ...
Interesting timing: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100328

Interesting indeed, wonder what made Montezuma sharpen his cost-conscious focus like that all of a sudden?

The desire to keep noisy old fashioned V8 engines with the argument that they are cheap?

richard_leeds wrote:The desire to keep noisy old fashioned V8 engines with the argument that they are cheap?

That, or a sponsor who don't have half-naked blondes and free Cristal on top of their agenda at the moment?

Or that Italy appears to be next on the bailout list and Montezemolo harbors political aspirations.

EDIT: Did I miss something? I thought Europe went through this mess before we, the U.S., did in 2008-09?

bhallg2k wrote:Or that Italy appears to be next on the bailout list and Montezemolo harbors political aspirations.

EDIT: Did I miss something? I thought Europe went through this mess before we, the U.S., did in 2008-09?

Are you kidding, Lehman brothers and Fannie Mae is a breeze in comparison to what's happening in southern Europe and with the Euro as a currency, we're talking entire nations facing bankruptcy.

xpensive wrote:

bhallg2k wrote:Or that Italy appears to be next on the bailout list and Montezemolo harbors political aspirations.

EDIT: Did I miss something? I thought Europe went through this mess before we, the U.S., did in 2008-09?

Are you kidding, Lehman brothers and Fannie Mae is a breeze in comparison to what's happening in southern Europe and with the Euro as a currency, we're talking entire nations facing bankruptcy.

Honest question: is bankrupcy worse than a dictatorship imposed by a foreign country? Let's not forget that the governments in Italy and Greece have not been democraticaly elected, and any and every economic decission taken by Ireland and Portugal must be approved by an external agent.

The main issue against bankrupcy seems to be the political fallout following a default by any country in Europe. Right now, people in southern Europe are told the northern countries don't want any sort of implication that could help them. People in the northern countries are being told that southerners are lazy, overspenders and only want a free ride on their tax. This doesn't look good.

That's why I've never understood the euro.

Common markets, no tariffs and no commission paid for exchange of currency.

bhallg2k wrote:That's why I've never understood the euro.

It's a political not economic project by the ruling elite for the ruling elite, although in this case the word elite doesn't mean what they think it means.

Indeed. It's literally impossible to get every state in the U.S. on the same page for any policy whatsoever. I can't imagine trying to do even half that job in Europe.

bhallg2k wrote:That's why I've never understood the euro.

While I'm becoming more euroskeptic in its current implementation, I could see the reasoning behind it. It gives the manufacturers (essentially Germany, but not only them) a bigger market, with a fixed currency exchange, that's not affected by oil price fluctuations and currency devaluation. It gives importers a more stable currency (until essentially this year), coupled with cheaper credit. It gives banks a bigger pool of debt to work with, without exposing themselves to currency fluctuations.

The reasoning against it is clear: if at some point the economic interests of the different parties diverge, all hell breaks loose. The belgians will think the dutch are stealing their chocolate, and the dutch will blame the belgians for tulip smuggling. At that point, you either have a vision of compromise and unity, or you start playing the blame game.

The EU is currently half a state. There is a constitution, but mostly relates with economic issues (win-fail). It's been approved in some countries via referendum, but it's approval is not mandatory (win-fail). There is a parliament, that is democratically elected, with the president rotating from each country (win-undecided). However, at least in Spain, the politicians sent to Europe are sent to be silenced, or to end their careers (fail! fail!). There are some brilliant human rights decisions, but there is no general external affairs policy, nor, as far as I know, a general "plan of European improvement" (win-massive fail).

At some point we either give the final step and do a true integration, and assume that a French will be deciding on putting a nuclear plant in Andalucia, and a Portuguese will open a recycling plant in Dresden, or we break up. It's difficult to be half friends on troubled times.

myurr wrote:Interesting timing: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100328

Indeed it is interesting. Teams don't say this kind of thing for no reason.