As the discussion on the presumed use of the livery on the Ferrari Formula 1 car as subliminal advertising for Philip Morris products continues to be a hot topic the Scuderia Ferrari has decided to modify their livery starting with the Spanish GP.
It has little to do with what the cars have on them.xpensive wrote:Wonder where the line is drawn, what if Ferrrari added the white angle on the nose and wings?
Are you sure about sponsorship(not advertising), I mean Ferrari-Philip Morris deal was not really a secret to anyone, but what of it? Only when some "expert" ran out of funding and decided the best way to get some money would be pointing at Ferrari, this became an issue?autogyro wrote:It has little to do with what the cars have on them.xpensive wrote:Wonder where the line is drawn, what if Ferrrari added the white angle on the nose and wings?
It is illegal for the teams to have tobacco sponsorship in F1 period.
If a tobacco company has been paying money to an F1 team, the money should be taken away period.
No, no, no what I want to say is, I have never read the exact regulations and so I don't know if sponsorship is still possible as opposed to advertising. Also Marlboro might say they are investing not sponsoring, because as it appears they are selling the space back to other companies.autogyro wrote:Are you sure about sponsorship(not advertising), I mean Ferrari-Philip Morris deal was not really a secret to anyone, but what of it? Only when some "expert" ran out of funding and decided the best way to get some money would be pointing at Ferrari, this became an issue?
Philip Morris is a tobacco company. Any money going from a tobacco company to an F1 team can only be explained as sponsorship.
If you can define it differently, please explain.
Just because Ferrari has got away with this for a few years and forced other financial aspects of the issue using Fota and attempted to use the courts to delay the inevitable outcome in Europe, does not mean they are not breaking European law.
So, could you kind of like give me a link to the exact directive which prohibits tobacco sponsorship in F1. As I see it sponsorship does not equal advertising, let us see what the law says.autogyro wrote:If they are buying advertising space and calling it investment, it is still tobacco advertising/sponsorship, which is illegal in Europe period.
If they are just giving Ferrari money with absolutely NO advertising anywhere, it is STILL sponsorship.
Do West give McLaren any money?
The law doesnt matter those cars are red. Fine them and fine them now.Avto wrote:So, could you kind of like give me a link to the exact directive which prohibits tobacco sponsorship in F1. As I see it sponsorship does not equal advertising, let us see what the law says.autogyro wrote:If they are buying advertising space and calling it investment, it is still tobacco advertising/sponsorship, which is illegal in Europe period.
If they are just giving Ferrari money with absolutely NO advertising anywhere, it is STILL sponsorship.
Do West give McLaren any money?
All tobacco advertising and sponsorship on television has been banned within the European Union since 1991 under the Television Without Frontiers Directive (1989)[24] This ban was extended by the Tobacco Advertising Directive, which took effect in July 2005 to cover other forms of media such as the internet, print media, radio, and sports event like F1. The directive does not include advertising in cinemas and on billboards or using merchandising – or tobacco sponsorship of cultural and sporting events which are purely local, with participants coming from only one Member State[25] as these fall outside the jurisdiction of the European Commission. However, most member states have transposed the directive with national laws that are wider in scope than the directive and cover local advertising. A 2008 European Commission report concluded that the directive had been successfully transposed into national law in all EU member states, and that these laws were well implemented.[26]Avto wrote:So, could you kind of like give me a link to the exact directive which prohibits tobacco sponsorship in F1. As I see it sponsorship does not equal advertising, let us see what the law says.autogyro wrote:If they are buying advertising space and calling it investment, it is still tobacco advertising/sponsorship, which is illegal in Europe period.
If they are just giving Ferrari money with absolutely NO advertising anywhere, it is STILL sponsorship.
Do West give McLaren any money?
From a tobacco company what else could it possibly be.timbo wrote:I think you should start with legal definition of sponsorship, is there clear conditions under which money transfer is deemed as sponsorship?
ash tray development fundingautogyro wrote:From a tobacco company what else could it possibly be.timbo wrote:I think you should start with legal definition of sponsorship, is there clear conditions under which money transfer is deemed as sponsorship?
