EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
manchild
manchild
12
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:54 am

EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... 111124.ece
From The Times April 29, 2010

Ferrari F1 barcode a ‘smokescreen for cigarette adverts’
Suzy Jagger and Rory Watson

Leading doctors are demanding an immediate government inquiry into “subliminal” tobacco advertising on Ferrari’s Formula One cars, and the company’s $1 billion relationship with the maker of Marlboro cigarettes, The Times has learnt.

The red, white and black bar code emblazoned on Ferrari’s racing cars and its drivers’ overalls is designed to remind viewers of a packet of Marlboro cigarettes, it is claimed. Under EU legislation it is an offence for a tobacco company to sponsor sporting events.

Yesterday a spokesman for the European Public Health Commissioner said he thought that Marlboro’s approach constituted potential subliminal marketing. He urged the Spanish and British governments to ascertain whether the world’s second-biggest tobacco company might be in breach of the law.

Formula One teams are due to fly into Spain for the European leg of the season which begins in ten days’ time. The British Grand Prix is on July 11.

Don Elgie, chief executive of Creston, which owns the advertising agency DLKW, said he thought that the bar code was subliminal advertising — where a brand is so recognisable that consumers can be reminded of a product without actually seeing it.

John Britton, a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and director of its tobacco advisory group, said: “The bar code looks like the bottom half of a packet of Marlboro cigarettes. I was stunned when I saw it. This is pushing at the limits. If you look at how the bar code has evolved over the last four years, it looks like creeping branding.”

Gerard Hastings, director of the Centre for Tobacco Control Research, said: “I think this is advertising. Why a bar code? What is their explanation?”

Frank Dobson, who was Health Secretary between 1997 and 1999, also called for an inquiry. Mr Dobson, now a backbench Labour MP, said: “The tobacco firms were working out years ago how they could advertise if there was a ban on tobacco advertising.”

Spokesmen for Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer, and the Department of Health refused to comment. A spokesperson for the BBC, which has a contract to broadcast Formula One, said: “We are confident that Formula One, and as a result our coverage of Formula One, is fully compliant with regulations.”

In September 2005 Philip Morris, the maker of Marlboro, extended its financial backing for the Ferrari team until 2011, despite the ban on cigarette branding on cars racing in the European Union. The contract is understood to be worth $1 billion over ten years and Philip Morris said Ferraris would not carry Marlboro branding where there was a ban.

A spokesman for the Italian car maker said: “The bar code is part of the livery of the car, it is not part of a subliminal advertising campaign.”

Asked about the Philip Morris contract he said: “$100 million [a year] is not a correct figure. We do not disclose the figure — the figure you mention, it is lower.”

Ferrari is the only Formula One team with a tobacco brand in its formal title, Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro. Its logo also has the bar code and its drivers, Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa, wear overalls bearing the bar code next to the Ferrari logo on each arm.

Philip Morris said: “We are confident that our relationship with Ferrari does not violate the UK 2002 Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act. The Formula One Grand Prix in the UK does not involve any race cars, team apparel, equipment or track signage carrying tobacco product branding. The same is true for all other Formula One races across the world.”
$1 billion?! :shock:

Talk about cost cutting and why non-tobacco sponsored teams had to leave F1.

Image
Last edited by manchild on Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

autogyro
autogyro
53
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:03 pm

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

Now you will all see the results of Montezemolos actions delaying Kers with Fota and fighting the FIA.
The FIA has a direct channel into the European government.
One billion pounds worth of sponsorship was to high a price for Fiat to pay for a motor mouth like Montezemolo.
Now let them run their own series in a garden in Ghana.

lebesset
lebesset
7
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:00 pm

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

apart from knowing it was something to do with philip morris I have never paid any attention to this ...certainly never noticed any 'progression '

on the other hand I don't understand how a team can be allowed a cigarette brand in it's name ...... are we going to see john player lotus ?
to the optimist a glass is half full ; to the pessimist a glass is half empty ; to the F1 engineer the glass is twice as big as it needs to be

CMSMJ1
CMSMJ1
Moderator
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:51 am
Location: Chesterfield, United Kingdom

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

Nobody griping about Ducati in MotoGP - they have the same branding..
IMPERATOR REX ANGLORUM

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:54 am

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

CMSMJ1 wrote:Nobody griping about Ducati in MotoGP - they have the same branding..
After your post they just might :mrgreen:

andrew
andrew
0
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:08 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

To point out the stupidity of the tobacco ban, sponsorship can come from alcohol, arms or pharmaceutical companies. All pretty deadl as well as tobacco. Why not go the extra step with the "speed Kills campaigns" and put 20mph limits on the tracks? :lol:

Tobacco advertising has helped create some of the best and most recognisable colour scheme in F1. Bring back tobacco advertising I say. Subliminal advertising my ar*e!

If these "Doctors" are this bored, they could easily start on the cure for cancer. [-o<

Political correctness gone mad is all this is!

autogyro
autogyro
53
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:03 pm

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

Shame isnt it :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

sticky667
sticky667
0
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 8:33 pm

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

if they've just seen it, where have they been for the past 5 odd years? ferrari isn't exactly a fly by night operation.

Giblet
Giblet
5
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:47 am
Location: Canada

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

andrew wrote:To point out the stupidity of the tobacco ban, sponsorship can come from alcohol, arms or pharmaceutical companies. All pretty deadl as well as tobacco. Why not go the extra step with the "speed Kills campaigns" and put 20mph limits on the tracks? :lol:

Tobacco advertising has helped create some of the best and most recognisable colour scheme in F1. Bring back tobacco advertising I say. Subliminal advertising my ar*e!

If these "Doctors" are this bored, they could easily start on the cure for cancer. [-o<

Political correctness gone mad is all this is!
Smoking is stupid, and should not be promoted in any way. It puts a huge drain on our medical system and families.

I just had my four year anniversary of my last smoke, and I am still feeling effects. I still on occasion cough up small chunks of black --- from the depths of my lungs, but I still miss it on some level.

How screwed up is that?

Drinking alcohol is only a problem if you make it so, most people in the world are able to have an occasional drink, and it is not nearly as addictive, especially physically.

I go to the range and shoot my brother's rifle and glock (not Timo hehe) from time to time. I also shoot skeet on occasion. Comparing it to the addictive properties of tobacco, and how the tobacco make their money is asinine at best. Tobacco companies are the worst kind of evil, and they process their tobacco with chemicals, like benzene, which does nothing apart from kill you faster, and make the nicotine 12 times more addictive.

Tobacco is also processed in facilities where there are very few if any regulations about cleanliness. That is why smokers get sick more often, as bacteria remains in the tobacco, and you draw it deep into your lungs. The heat from the cheery does not kill them.

If Tobacco advertising was not there, another company could have easily took it's place. Your argument, unfortunately, is invalid.

Because my country, Canada, was one of the countries to put an early ban on tobacco advertising, they lost the race for a few years. They couldn't hold one of the best and most loved races on the calendar, because they were competing with tracks that could still ride the coat tails of misery, death, and ill health.

My entire library of books still stinks, as I smoked around them. Some people enjoy smoking, but thinking it's just a matter of being PC is approaching the loss of a chromosome.

"But the cars looked really pretty. Yuk yuk."
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

User avatar
Tim.Wright
327
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:29 am

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

I recall seeing barcode branded Williams in 95 when they were not allowed to carry their Rothmans signage.

So thats 15 years ago

Tim
Not the engineer at Force India

User avatar
flynfrog
Moderator
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:31 pm

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

Giblet wrote:
andrew wrote:To point out the stupidity of the tobacco ban, sponsorship can come from alcohol, arms or pharmaceutical companies. All pretty deadl as well as tobacco. Why not go the extra step with the "speed Kills campaigns" and put 20mph limits on the tracks? :lol:

Tobacco advertising has helped create some of the best and most recognisable colour scheme in F1. Bring back tobacco advertising I say. Subliminal advertising my ar*e!

If these "Doctors" are this bored, they could easily start on the cure for cancer. [-o<

Political correctness gone mad is all this is!
Smoking is stupid, and should not be promoted in any way. It puts a huge drain on our medical system and families.

I just had my four year anniversary of my last smoke, and I am still feeling effects. I still on occasion cough up small chunks of black --- from the depths of my lungs, but I still miss it on some level.

How screwed up is that?

Drinking alcohol is only a problem if you make it so, most people in the world are able to have an occasional drink, and it is not nearly as addictive, especially physically.

I go to the range and shoot my brother's rifle and glock (not Timo hehe) from time to time. I also shoot skeet on occasion. Comparing it to the addictive properties of tobacco, and how the tobacco make their money is asinine at best. Tobacco companies are the worst kind of evil, and they process their tobacco with chemicals, like benzene, which does nothing apart from kill you faster, and make the nicotine 12 times more addictive.

Tobacco is also processed in facilities where there are very few if any regulations about cleanliness. That is why smokers get sick more often, as bacteria remains in the tobacco, and you draw it deep into your lungs. The heat from the cheery does not kill them.

If Tobacco advertising was not there, another company could have easily took it's place. Your argument, unfortunately, is invalid.

Because my country, Canada, was one of the countries to put an early ban on tobacco advertising, they lost the race for a few years. They couldn't hold one of the best and most loved races on the calendar, because they were competing with tracks that could still ride the coat tails of misery, death, and ill health.

My entire library of books still stinks, as I smoked around them. Some people enjoy smoking, but thinking it's just a matter of being PC is approaching the loss of a chromosome.

"But the cars looked really pretty. Yuk yuk."
So F1 cars made you smoke? Smoking is a choice. Last time I checked I dont buy shell gas or use ING. Not say advertising doesn't work but at some point you have to stop trying blame everyone else.

Giblet
Giblet
5
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:47 am
Location: Canada

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

I never once blamed anyone in my post for my starting to smoke.

I do blame them however for making the product highly addictive, and horribly wrong. I started when I was a teen, and was hooked early ans easily.

It doesn't make tobacco, or Ferrari racing off the backs of cancer and misery right on any level.

I have my own boycotts as well. I understand choice, but the average person trying a few smokes with their friends when they are young have no idea just how incredibly addictive tobacco is.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

hecti
hecti
13
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:34 am
Location: Montreal, QC

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

This is certainly not new news to me.
they've been doing this since tobacco was banned in 2004 (correct me if im wrong)
I wonder why anyone cares, specially after such a long time of this practice.

These doctors are stupid.

User avatar
flynfrog
Moderator
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:31 pm

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

Giblet wrote:I never once blamed anyone in my post for my starting to smoke.

I do blame them however for making the product highly addictive, and horribly wrong. I started when I was a teen, and was hooked early ans easily.

It doesn't make tobacco, or Ferrari racing off the backs of cancer and misery right on any level.

I have my own boycotts as well. I understand choice, but the average person trying a few smokes with their friends when they are young have no idea just how incredibly addictive tobacco is.
I do like you I started smoking in high school. I quit about 4 years ago or so. I still have one once or twice a year. But it much more to do with my friends then any add on the side of a car. Why should some one not be allowed to advertise a legal product. We have drug companies shoving there newest creation down our throats all of the time. Or what about fast food. Its arguable worse that cigarettes now should be ban them too. Its kind of a lost cause to legislate morality.

Giblet
Giblet
5
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:47 am
Location: Canada

Re: EU slams Ferrari over Marlboro partnership

Post

I understand what you are saying. You shouldn't legislate morality, but as a society we can and do in all facets of it.

All kinds of things that are morally unacceptable are against the law where I live, Canada. Taking pot is against the law, except for medical purposes. I only say 'taking' as you don't have to smoke it to get high. I have no moral or ethical problems with pot, but I also don't think that a kid should try it, because he saw an ad with a cool looking guy smoking a joint and laughing with a bunch of pretty girls.

But pot is not a physically addictive substance. This is where the moral problem with tobacco lies.

Ferrari should be able to carry the Marlboro advertising as well, however they should have to slap a surgeons general warning on each car and logo right beside them. Subliminal or not.

Once addiction comes into play, you are in essence stealing in whole or in part someones will power. We can't add addictive substances to food to hook people on brand of burger for this same reason. It's unfair, just as adding hazardous chemicals to tobacco to increase it's addictive properties is purely evil, and should be dealt with as such.

If Tobacco was not addictive, I would have no problem with it being advertised, as few if any people would continue to smoke it regularly.

For me the ideal solution is simple. Ban all tobacco advertising, and all profits should go directly into the healthcare system. Every team but Ferrari seem to be able to run a couple race cars without it.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute