F1 - where has all the money gone?

[RS]

With even decent teams like Lotus and Sauber struggling for cash, it really makes me wonder why there are very few "real" sponsors involved in F1? It has a fanbase of hundreds of millions around the world, probably of a good demographic, yet there seem to be very few big brands interested in F1 these days.

By "real" sponsors, I mean ones which don't either

- own the team (Red Bull)
- Are owned by the owner of the team (Kingfisher e.t.c.)
- Are linked specifically to the driver (PDVSA, Venezuela e.t.c.)

It seems not only is F1 too expensive, but the corporate world is not really interested.

I think it's a problem when even relatively successful teams like Lotus can't pay their bills.

[Mark]

The world is still basically in recession.

Sponsoring F1 teams is exceptionally expensive in terms of the return you get for your investment.

Back in the day there was a ready supply of cash from companies that needed to boost the profile of their brands but we're heavily restricted in advertising in other ways. But we don't allow tobacco sponsorship any more.

[steveaki13]

My head spins really.

I mean on the one hand all of the limiting rules to save cash and F1 as it is now, leads to large portions of races being cruisey save fuel, tyres, gearbox, engine races. Which I hate and would prefer unlimited engines, gearboxes & tyres to allow more pushing in races.

On the other hand costs are so high already, that new and existing teams are already struggling and suggests that costs need slashing.

Maybe the answer comes with slashing the technical side of F1 for more basic cars? Allowing more racing for less money and new teams to enter.

[webberf1]

The world is still basically in recession.

Sponsoring F1 teams is exceptionally expensive in terms of the return you get for your investment.

Back in the day there was a ready supply of cash from companies that needed to boost the profile of their brands but we're heavily restricted in advertising in other ways. But we don't allow tobacco sponsorship any more.

Well that will spell big problems if (as looks like it will happen) the western economies slide back into another massive recession.

[555-04Q2]

One word......Bernie......he has all the money!

[zako85]

I don't think that things are much different now compared to 20-30 years ago, despite of changes in rules, etc. It's the same cycle of birth, life, and death now as before, often driven by recessions. Back in 80-90s many previously strong teams suddenly struggled and went out of business or were bought out (Lotus, Ligier, Prost, Tyrrell, etc). Now we have something similar going on as well. Some people think you could somehow equalize all teams by reducing everyone's budget to the level of Marussia and then end with a 10-way title tie to the last race, but this can never happen IMHO.

[Malbec]

I don't think that things are much different now compared to 20-30 years ago,

One thing has changed. F1 and FOM are far more aggressive in getting sponsors to sponsor either the sport itself or individual races than teams.

The argument is difficult to fault. Sponsoring a team is very risky. You might sign a 5 year deal with a top team only to find it slide down the grid and get less exposure (like McLaren). The team might get caught up in a major scandal and dirty your name (like McLaren). The team might go bust. At any race the cars might spin out on the first lap reducing your exposure.

Instead if you sponsor a race or the sport your title's exposure will be guaranteed and will be more visible to the casual viewer.

Thats why Sauber lost UBS to F1, the chief exec wanted to sponsor the team but the board realised it made more sense to sponsor F1. Apparently if FOM hear of a major sponsor lining up to sponsor a team they try to get them to sponsor the sport instead, so its a wonder that any of the teams get good deals these days.

[dj_bytedisaster]

On top of that, the big sponsors of yesteryear aren't allowed anymore - tobacco companies.

[Whyzars]

Ummmm, an F1 sponsor can go a whole season to see a glimpse of their logo on CNN. The vision that was captured when Alonso gave Webber a lift back to the pits was a rare moment and very rewarding for their sponsors. The camera's followed the pair as they made their way around the circuit. Every news program had it as a major vision for the race. It will be played over and over.

That one exceptional event is why sponsors pay for their logo on an F1 car. I'll bet sponsors would want to see more rare moments like that.

Instead of turning a blind eye and giving the drivers a dressing down for being naughty - nobody was killed -, the governing body slaps them both down and sends one of the top drivers in F1, who is racing in his last season, back in the pack at his next race. Red Bull must be livid and every sponsor of an F1 car should be protesting the decision to penalise Webber.

The teams should demand the Webber decision be overturned for the sake of potential sponsors who might be discouraged to see F1 as a sport where nothing interesting is allowed to happen.

You ask where the money has gone, the regime of mediocrity and blandness that has evolved could be a pointer...

[AndyL]

Instead of turning a blind eye and giving the drivers a dressing down for being naughty - nobody was killed -, the governing body slaps them both down and sends one of the top drivers in F1, who is racing in his last season, back in the pack at his next race. Red Bull must be livid and every sponsor of an F1 car should be protesting the decision to penalise Webber.

A dressing down is exactly what they got isn't it? That's pretty much the definition of a reprimand. Webber's grid penalty is for 3 reprimands - for this incident, and speeding under yellow flags, and colliding with Rosberg.