Sponsorship puzzle

[CleanTone]

1. I heard that "electronic paint" has been invented.(It will sent a specific ad, sponsorship for different broadcasters) Couldn't this solve the issue by changing the aproach to sponsorship deals(nationally, not global)
2. Why is it illegal to have different sponsorship on the 2 cars(I remember the BAR issue)
3. Is it illegal to have race deals?
4. Why havent't Coca Cola or Pepsi sustained their auto sponsorship(except a NASCAR, the Jordan 7UP and the F3000 car)?

[Adam43]

Electronic paint. Do you mean like 'blue screen' technolgy?

Coca Cola, I have just read today in Autosport, limit themselves to sposoring only four cars worldwide and only two in Europe. A couple of Radicals (!) have got that deal for this year!

[NiceGuyEddie]

I don't believe its illegal to have racedeals. Sponsors get added or removed throughout the year. Mostly no leading sponsors, because those contracts tend to stretch out yearly. I do remember March having race to race sponsoring during 1992. They sold room on the car to local businesses.

[RWC]

1.I think you mean blue(or green)screen,as adam said?
I'm not sure it's applicable to moving cars just yet...but would be interested in being proved wrong...
2.Because bernie and max stamped their collective little feet in one of the (regular)hissy fits.
3.No
4.Coke and pepsi think f1 is not worth the money(bearing in mind their target audience and all the complications implied therein) and they're probably right.f1 is massively overpriced.Sure those companies could easily afford it but they simply get better exposure elsewhere

[avsfan733]

it probably is appicable to race cars. i know that they do something similar with the tracking of cars on the Daytona 500 and NASCAR coverage with the pointer/number panel. And I think FOX also had talked about digitally removing car sponsors who didn't buy television spots

[RWC]

Originally posted by avsfan733
FOX also had talked about digitally removing car sponsors who didn't buy television spots

Wow! Imagine where that could lead!!
Cars on the tack without any TV network approved sponsers would be totally blank!

[GTV27]

Could viewers choose how they would like their cars sponsored (or unsponsored):

scarlet for Ferarri ('natch)
silver for the macs
blue for the Willys
french blue for Renault
white for BAR
green for jordan
BRG for Jag
beige for Toyota (hehehehe)
jeez, what colour do you paint a sauber? puce maybe?
hot pink for Minardi

[Lee Janotta]

Last year FOX _did_ digitally remove sponsor logos from cars during practice and qualifying for one race, if those sponsors had not purchased airtime. NBC later refused to say "Lowes Motor Speedway", instead using the old (and preferable, but not _technically_ correct) "Charlotte Motor Speedway" name. Which led to Humpy Wheeler driving a tow truck up to the broadcast trailer and threatening to drag it away if they didn't get the name right!

During IRL races, ESPN has been able to project an image of the winner's face onto the track digitally (in the TV signal, not actually on the track), with the cars passing _over_ it, to the viewer's eye.

And yes, FOX has managed to get those little pointers to follow the cars around the track.

For such technologically "primitive" series, they sure come up with some innovative production techniques. You've _got_ to take care of the TV audience!

[avsfan733]

can't wait to see wat bernie tries to do to surpass us crazy americans maybe digitally changing who drives which car? or which motor they have?

[RussianFriend]

It's funny to start behind Ferrari and finish behind Minardi.

[mirwin]

BAR had a one race deal with EA Sports at the US GP a couple of years ago. I wonder why more teams don't get one race deals where tobacco sponsorship is not allowed?

[andy_b]

it was a two race deal btw. There is nothing stoppingr race deals, but its unusal, but liveries of smaller teams do change thru the year as people sign up, they just happen to be small sponsors.

What did the digitally removed logos look like. could you tell it had been faked?

Coca Cola and other big multi-nationals sometimes have problems organising different importers/marketers to stump up the case. It gets more confuing as in some countries such as UK, Coca Cola is marketed by Schweepes. On the same theme I think this is the reason that the 7Up Jordan appeared in Pepsi colours in Japan as 7Up is marketed as a rival (i believe)

another example. B&H, JPS and up until recentley West were all marketed in Germany by the same company. Now why would the German company want to put money in the B&H fund hen they already do with West (this is old and now that Remmesta has been sold I believe is in correct)

[Snrub]

I think in the case of Coke and Pepsi, F1 racing doesn't fit in with their marketing stratagies. Some companies just sponsor things, others look for angles.

Requiring both cars on a team to be the same is stupid. It should be up to the team and the sponsor. Seeing as sponsorship is hard to find and the little teams are struggling, changing this rule could aleviate a big problem.

[R]

Snrub, you are absolutely right. I for one wouldn't mind at all seeing two different liveries on the cars in a team. It's what BAR wanted to do with their 1999 car, which later came to be known as the "zipmobile". And as you imply, it would make sponsorship a bit more affordable for "smaller" (relatively speaking) sponsors, and the struggling teams would have better chances of survival.

[Lee Janotta]

It'd also end team orders, if the team cars were carrying different sponsors (as is the case in Champcars and NASCAR, where team orders are almost unheard of).