EC Going After Ferrari, Marlboro: Vices

While I give congrats to EU to improve general health, I have to always step back and look at the logic of such and just shake my head: Not meaning to stop their efforts, just improve their methods of reasoning.

...so, why not Johnny Walker or Petronis?


http://www.totalf1.com/view-article.php?newsid=224204

"
The European Commission has vowed to redouble its efforts to stub-out formula one's persistent last links to tobacco.

The EC's health commissioner Markos Kyprianou will specifically target Ferrari, the last team on the grid still accepting sponsorship from a cigarette brand (Marlboro), and the three race venues that allow trackside tobacco-related adverts, according to the Financial Times.

"Formula one race drivers are viewed as heroes," Kyprianou said.

"They can become role models. So the young people watch these people with tobacco signs on their chest and the wrong message goes out."

The consultancy firm Sport+Markt estimates the value of Ferrari's Marlboro contract at $200m, making it one of the most lucrative in F1 despite the team not being able to display the logos at many events because of the European Union's 2005 ban.

Kyprianou is also reported to have met this week with Monaco's Prince Albert, urging him to disallow cigarette advertising for the historic grand prix there.

F1 venues China and Bahrain also allow tobacco signage.

'FT', however, said Kyprianou was unlikely to win the support of F1's governing body because the European Union does not share a good relationship with the FIA.
"

 

A few years ago the EU Dorks went after Bernie claiming F1 was a Monopoly, in the end Bernie got the last laugh.

 

I have been watching F1 since 1987 , i was 7 , and it never made me want to smoke..

 

Gov't meddling in our lives. Will it ever end?

I am not a smoker and detest smoking, but there are some sho want to tell us everything that we can do.

 

The EU taking a shot at big tobacco gives the impression that they're actually concerned about people's health. Who knows? Maybe they're trying to get some concessions out of it. F have just been hanging on because it's too good a deal to give up. I was reading that Marlboro offered to pay Schumi's and Raikkonen's salaries to the tune of $70MM when it was rumored that they would both possibly drive for the Scuderia. So it gives you a rough idea of what kind of tab Marlboro are paying to keep the boys in red running around the track.

 

In my eyes, if seeing a tobacco ad on a car makes you decide to smoke as a child, your parents did not do their jobs well. People need to take responsibility for their actions and stop blaming everyone but themselves for their problems.

Mark

 

But they would run red anyway. Maybe a little green and white accent.

 

I don't see the drivers lighting up in the post race interview saying they never could have done it without smoking a pack of Marlboro Lights every day, so I really don't see what the problem is. The only thing that the Marlboro on the car would make me do is buy Marlboro over other brands, It's never given me an urge to take up smoking which is why the ban is ridiculous.

 

similar thread was brought up before the start of the season regarding the bar code / Marboro livery.
I like Phil detest smoking, but don;t like the governement telling me what I can and cannot do- as long as it isn't effecting others go for it.
I have no problem with tobacco livery as long as I don't have to breath in the smoke. You guys ever wonder why Marlboro spends so much - even when they can't show their logo? They must be getting some mileage out of it- whether its getting people to smoke more or bringing on new smokers why the hell are these guys sepnding so much. So while most of the people on this forum don't smoke because we see a tobacco brands logo on an F1 car- obviously there are plenty of people out there that do. I can't imagine there marketing department likes pissing away money

 

You sir are right on target. It's a shame the idea of responsibility has faded

 

i don't have any problems seeing F1 cars with tobacco ads. i was taught to stay away from cigs since i was a child. my best friend smokes, but it's just him. watching him smoke never temmpted me to to smoke.

 

+1 Well said.

 

A very good point and something I've always pondered. A possible answer might be that their budgets haven't changed since the days when they could advertise freely in all forms of media and anywhere they wanted. Maybe with fewer places to spend, when they get the opportunity, they don't mind taking out the Platinum.

How is it that upper echelon health officials can legitimately eliminate the advertising of any product that is sold with their uniform approval ? The EU's Kyprianou is representative of typical bureaucracy everywhere, who need their day in the sun to validate their posting rather than deal with their own hypocracy.

 

Markos Kyprianou should first concentrate his effeorts in his native Country of Greece, where they still smoke like ...Turks !!

 

That's not the purpose of this kind of advertising: This is just to raise brand awareness. If you already smoke, they want you to switch to Marlboros.

I'm not a smoker, but I totally love Marlboro logos on all things Ferraris. I would hate to see them pushed out.

 

Very well put, brand awareness.

 

No, thanks to technology it's only getting worse...

/rant

 

As many times as Ferrari has changed sponsors I no longer pay attention. Who the hell really cares but Ferrari themselves. The only time you might care is when you buy a team shirt. You kinda look out of style with last years sponsors on your gear. I support Shell. They give out free Ferrari stickers.

As far as Ferrari's other sponsors. How many times as owners have we been asked to change our brand of oil or change our tires to suit Ferrari's current sponsors? I find it to be annoying at times.

 

Exactly. My "pit crew" replica shirt is dated with Vodaphone and Marlboro on it. I wear it anyway, especially to vintage races. LOL

 

You really have a beautiful Spider.

 

I agree but to add to what has already been said....Unfortunately tobaco adds do get people to start smoking as well as switch brands. It does effect us all through second hand smoke as well as the added costs to out health care systems. Dont know if it effects the health care systems in the US but it does here in Canada. It has gotten to the point that some doctors will not treat smokers in there family offices.

 

Then the product should be made illigal and not be sold. The problem with that is the amount of money the govt gets in taxes.
If you check the amount of taxes on one pack your eyes would pop. Example Pack cost $5.00 Product Manufacture gets 50 to 60 cents
the govt gets the rest. All in the name of taxes. So, if you do not want smokers, make it illigal and watch it flouriosh via the black market.
Where is a good speak easy when you need one???

 

Maybe they are going to restrict, proscribe or otherwise try to discourage other, even more deadly and virulent behaviour, that has the added detriment of being able to be spread from one person to another, such as anal sex?

Nah...

That wouldn't be the direction that the EUSS is going.

 

I agree with the EU officials. Ditch Marlboro.

 

I dont know about other countries, but in the US, when you advertise it gives you a great break in taxes. They have stopped all roadside billboard adverts, magazines, newspapers, makes it pretty tough to advertise or get breaks for advertising when they block you. I can see how handing money to Ferrari could actually help them both.

Personally, I no longer smoke, but like others hate meddling governments. So I find the whole thing very humorous.