[Team] Ferrari: in F1

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I have long wondered what Philip Morris gains from this partnership. As long as the Ferrari cars and team feature on TV programmes within the EU, no promotional material can be used, so how does Philip Morris benefit?

And how does Ferrari get away with claiming that Philip Morris are a sponsor, when the EU forbids it? And has been battling with Ferrari over the issue since at least 2007 !

I suppose that Philip Morris benefit from the 'association' with Ferrari? I think that they also take a lot of corporate guests to the Grand Prix thereby enforcing the association.
How Ferrari gets away with it however is a completely different thing altogether!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I have long wondered what Philip Morris gains from this partnership. As long as the Ferrari cars and team feature on TV programmes within the EU, no promotional material can be used, so how does Philip Morris benefit?

And how does Ferrari get away with claiming that Philip Morris are a sponsor, when the EU forbids it? And has been battling with Ferrari over the issue since at least 2007 !

I think the Philip Morris benefit is that they can use 'Ferrari' in their own promotional material elsewhere. In a similar way to the image below.

With regards to sponsorship - I am not aware that there is specifically an EU restriction on a tobacco company providing sponsorship?
There are restrictions on the advertising of products, which resulted in the significant decline of tobacco funding in F1. In many parts of the world though, it was never totally forbidden - so Ferrari opted to no longer run under the banner of Marlboro from 2011 purely for public sensitivity.

[Mike Harte]

A very quick Google brings up this directive, and I am certain that there is a lot more: https://ec.europa.eu/health/tobacco/advertising_en

I am assuming that those advertising posters were in Monaco; they wouldn't be allowed in France.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

A very quick Google brings up this directive, and I am certain that there is a lot more: https://ec.europa.eu/health/tobacco/advertising_en

I am assuming that those advertising posters were in Monaco; they wouldn't be allowed in France.

Yes - Monaco posters. An example of the kind of activity Philip Morris pursue outside of the EU.

Thanks for the link.
I think there are a couple of different views on what constitutes sponsorship. In the EC directive they also provide an extra clarification on what they define as sponsorship 'The ban covers advertising and sponsorship with the aim or [sic] direct or indirect effect of promoting a tobacco product'.

I would imagine the lawyers in the red corner, if challenged, would assert that their interpretation of what is defined as sponsoring is a provision of funds, with no tobacco promotion associated. On Ferrari's website it gives a factual account of Philip Morris, rather than showing their brand(s).

The EC directive, whilst using the word 'sponsorship' has the intention of reducing advertising, not funding. The letter vs spirit of the law debate here possibly?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Yes - Monaco posters. An example of the kind of activity Philip Morris pursue outside of the EU.

Thanks for the link.
I think there are a couple of different views on what constitutes sponsorship. In the EC directive they also provide an extra clarification on what they define as sponsorship 'The ban covers advertising and sponsorship with the aim or [sic] direct or indirect effect of promoting a tobacco product'.

I would imagine the lawyers in the red corner, if challenged, would assert that their interpretation of what is defined as sponsoring is a provision of funds, with no tobacco promotion associated. On Ferrari's website it gives a factual account of Philip Morris, rather than showing their brand(s).

The EC directive, whilst using the word 'sponsorship' has the intention of reducing advertising, not funding. The letter vs spirit of the law debate here possibly?

I don't know if you are quoting from current EU directives, but the following, from a 2017 World Health Organisation directive, is far more explicit:

What should be included in a comprehensive ban on TAPS (Tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship) ?

The WHO FCTC (Article 1) provides a very broad definition of TAPS.
Tobacco advertising and promotion means “any form of commercial communication, recommendation or action with the aim, effect or likely effect of promoting a tobacco product or tobacco use either directly or indirectly”.

Tobacco sponsorship means “any form of contribution to any event, activity or individual with the aim, effect or likely effect of promoting a tobacco product or tobacco use either directly or indirectly”.
Therefore, it is important that enforceable measures be put into place to ban not only the traditional forms of direct advertising through media such as television, radio, print publications and billboards. There is also a need to ensure that indirect forms of TAPS, such as brand stretching, point of sale display of product and tobacco industry-sponsored CSR (corporate social responsibility) programmes, are also addressed. The WHO FCTC's Article 13 guidelines include an Annex with an indicative (non-exhaustive) list of forms of tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship within the terms of the WHO FCTC.

I cannot easily find how this impacts on EU directives, nor can I ascertain whether Monaco has signed up to TAPS.

Unfortunately, I cannot now find the part where this WHO directive includes sport teams and individuals, but it does exist. If I come across it again, I will post it.

[BSchneiderFan]

I'm not a smoker (apart from the odd cigar), but, boy, do I miss the Marlboro McLarens and Penskes.

[hondafan37]

According to Ferrarichat, Ferrari sells all the space to Philip Morris and they´re reselling it Santander, Shell, etc...

Originally Posted in Ferrarichat
You could almost say that Marlboro owns a F1 team just like Benetton did in the past, or Red Bull does now.

The fact that Arrivabene was put in charge is a clear indication of that.

When Benetton bought Toleman, they put a marketing man in charge: Flavia Briatore.
When Philip Morris took charge of the Scuderia, they threw away the existing Ferrari management and put one of their marketing executives at the head.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

I suppose that Philip Morris benefit from the 'association' with Ferrari? I think that they also take a lot of corporate guests to the Grand Prix thereby enforcing the association.
How Ferrari gets away with it however is a completely different thing altogether!

certainly they are working the B2B angle with corporate guests etc (plus for all the other brands controlled by the Altria Group) and are no doubt still doing a lot of direct advertising in non western and emerging markets...where they are still making a killing (literally).

i suspect they get away with it because of the above mentioned loophole plus they still have deep pockets and are willing to pay their lawyers to fight any and every injunction that comes their way.

and i wonder how much any EU (or any western gov't) watch group is willing or even capable of spending to fight against this last holdout?

[hondafan37]

Ferrari eyes 'healthy cigarette' sponsor IQOS for 2018

Ferrari could be about to announce a 'new' major sponsor for 2018. Recently, the Spanish bank Santander announced that it is leaving Ferrari and F1. The Spanish newspaper ABC now reports that the signage on the rear wing could be replaced for 2018 with a brand called IQOS.

According to 'invisible' Ferrari sponsor Philip Morris, Iqos is a high-tech technology device that heats rather than burns tobacco, releasing a 'nicotine-containing vapour' for the user. "Ferrari is finalising the agreement with Iqos about replacing the agreement with Santander," ABC claimed.

It is not clear if Iqos would contravene F1's strict ban on tobacco advertising. (GMM)

https://www.f1today.net/en/news/f1/2...utm_medium=rss

[S griffin]

We already see E cig and vape sponsorship in other motorsport (Indycar, NASCAR and BTCC) so why not F1?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by S griffin

We already see E cig and vape sponsorship in other motorsport (Indycar, NASCAR and BTCC) so why not F1?

Because IQOS is not an E-cig per se; it is heated tobacco that releases nicotine and other harmful chemicals. The tobacco companies, including Philip Morris who manufacture IQOS, have been unable to provide evidence that these products are less harmful than normal tobacco products.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

It is not clear if Iqos would contravene F1's strict ban on tobacco advertising. (GMM)

question...is it F1/FOM/FIA that have banned cig advertising or is it just an EU rule that F1 (for the most part) abides by?

i was always under the impression that this was an EU law (similar to most other western countries/regions) governing how cig companies are allowed to publicly advertise their products.

i suspect if its just an EU law, then the F1 teams will allow the courts to decide if e-cigs or similar are allowed and while that process works itself out they will gladly take the money in the short term.

more off topic...but with the wacky tabacky becoming decriminalized if not moving towards fully legal in several host countries, i wonder if we will soon be seeing that product/industry move into racing sponsorship?

anyways more on topic, im surprised no other F1 team (or other sports teams for that matter) have adopted a similar partnership as Ferrari have with PM.

[Mike Harte]

It's a moot point whether the FIA has or hasn't banned tobacco advertising as virtually every country has made tobacco advertising illegal, including showing racing cars with tobacco related logos. Mr E tried to circumvent the implementation of the ban in the UK by giving a £1 million bribe to the Labour Party in the UK when they came into power in 1997, but they were found out and were forced to return the money.

Advertising for E-cigs and vaping products are not currently banned in most countries, but adverts for products like IQOS are banned in a number of countries because they are manufactured using tobacco.

[Mekola]

If it's Altria the sponsor in fact (Philip Morris being part of it) wonder why not they could use Milka (chocolate brand) to advert in the cars instead...

[F1Guy]

Here we go again. Ferrari and the alternative F1 championship threat....

Sergio Marchionne: “I think that Ferrari has the strength to drag others as well to an alternative championship”

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-mo...-idUKKBN1EC2N2

[wolfhound]

Marchionne says he is going to take away all his toys from F1.
He seems to forget that those that last used all Ferrari's toys to dominate F1 now run F1 so they know a thing or two about dealing with the Italian team.
Also I thought Ferrari still have a veto.

Could they be of thinking linking up with Bernie to start a new series?
He used to always get Ferrari onside to control F1.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Marchionne says he is going to take away all his toys from F1.
He seems to forget that those that last used all Ferrari's toys to dominate F1 now run F1 so they know a thing or two about dealing with the Italian team.
Also I thought Ferrari still have a veto.

Could they be of thinking linking up with Bernie to start a new series?
He used to always get Ferrari onside to control F1.

Ferrari seem to be forgetting the FIA's response to their alternative series.

When Bernie last threatened a break away series; 1981?; the FIA said it would ban everyone who competed in the series from competing in any FIA sanctioned event, be they a competitor, entrant, official or venue.

No small threat, and very difficult to live with as a manufacturer competing in more than one series!

Besides, who but is going to want to participate in Ferrari's idea of a category, everybody in racing knows how self interested Ferrari are?

[S griffin]

I think both sides need to tread carefully here

[Sodemo]

Ferrari wont quit. They are just using it as a political means of putting pressure on FOM to get what they want.

[Akrapovic]

Ferrari will just build an Ind...wait.

Ferrari will just put some stickers on an IndyCar!

[steve_r]

Someone seems to think they are bigger than the sport.

[chillibowl]

playing devils advocate...if they can convince a couple of teams to go with them, possibly another engine manu, offer the sport via FTA and/or a reasonably priced streaming service, find tracks that F1/FIA has ignored and/or more races in the USA who here wouldnt watch the new breakaway series?

and its not so much about bringing others with them either...if Ferrari leaves would Merc and Renault be able to justify their budgets to their respective boards any longer? rather would they take this as an opportunity to pivot to FE...a direction they already seem to be investing in?

personally i dont think its going to happen but i do see the threat as legitimate...or at least legitimate enough that they will get what they want during the next round of negotiations.

anyways we have been here before and when it was FOTA i was of the opinion that while the teams may not be bigger then the sport they are certainly bigger then FOM and probably deserved our support over the sport itself.

but BE broke them...not sure Liberty has the stones to pull a BE.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

anyways we have been here before and when it was FOTA i was of the opinion that while the teams may not be bigger then the sport they are certainly bigger then FOM and probably deserved our support over the sport itself.

but BE broke them...not sure Liberty has the stones to pull a BE.

But you do have to remember that the way that BCE managed to do that was by bribing Ferrari with the package that they have now. And when there was a further log-jam later on, BCE broke the unanimity of the teams by yet again bribing Ferrari to break ranks.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

playing devils advocate...if they can convince a couple of teams to go with them, possibly another engine manu, offer the sport via FTA and/or a reasonably priced streaming service, find tracks that F1/FIA has ignored and/or more races in the USA who here wouldnt watch the new breakaway series?

and its not so much about bringing others with them either...if Ferrari leaves would Merc and Renault be able to justify their budgets to their respective boards any longer? rather would they take this as an opportunity to pivot to FE...a direction they already seem to be investing in?

personally i dont think its going to happen but i do see the threat as legitimate...or at least legitimate enough that they will get what they want during the next round of negotiations.

anyways we have been here before and when it was FOTA i was of the opinion that while the teams may not be bigger then the sport they are certainly bigger then FOM and probably deserved our support over the sport itself.

but BE broke them...not sure Liberty has the stones to pull a BE.

A devil's advocate response!

Ferrari is complaining that it doesn't want simpler or more standardized engines and wants to be able to put their own stamp on their power unit. So they would have to either adopt the current specification (probably the expedient path) or develop their own.

If they adopt the current spec, then that really doesn't solve issues fans care about. If they create a new spec, but don't want simple engines, then what manufacture would want to jump into that series given the risk that it might fail? The only thing that might work is for them to create a very simple engine formula that is less restrictive on design elements. But there is still risk that without a very proscriptive formula, this can result in a large amount of up-front research required to determine what the best solution is. Which is still risky for someone new to jump into.

Who would fund this series? You would need to setup an entirely new organization to run it. I would assume it would not get any blessing from FIA. I expect promoters will not be willing to put up any type of significant money to host an unproven series. If the TV is free to view, then there is really no or little money coming in from that. I expect it would be a large money pit for Ferrari in the short term (assuming it was successful at all). Would Ferrari shareholders approve of that?

F1/FIA could potentially be nimble if they needed to as well. If Ferrari tried a break away, the current series might make concessions to other teams to keep them. While Ferrari is looking to use the exit thread as a strategy to get what they want, any concessions to prevent a break away may not be in the direction Ferrari wants.

All in all, it would be a huge gamble (aka "build it and they will come") for Ferrari. It could all come crashing down. If Ferrari totally walks away from F1 and crashes and burns, they will have lost most of their bargaining power on re-entry to F1 at some later date. This broadly assumes that F1 would survive without Ferrari. IMHO it would be a hit for sure due to so much of the fans being Ferrari centric, but I think F1 would survive and come out on top if there was a break away series.

Personally I would love to see the new owners call Ferrari on this and use this opportunity to break the special Ferrari deal for the next iteration of the Concorde agreement.

Richard

[JHamilton]

Originally Posted by Mekola

If it's Altria the sponsor in fact (Philip Morris being part of it) wonder why not they could use Milka (chocolate brand) to advert in the cars instead...

Philip Morris = Altria. It's just a name change to isolate the tobacco portion of the business. They still own Nabisco - Kraft - Heinz.