Why no "tobaccie" ads at USGP?

Spritle · 28 Sep 2002, 00:08 (Ref:390280)

I couldn't help but notice in the land of Winston Cup racing and the Marlboro Man that the tobacco ads on the cars were covered up or modified. Is this an Indy thing or something else I missed?

woodbine · 28 Sep 2002, 00:23 (Ref:390285)

This is because tobacco companies can only sponsor one series in a country. Phillip Morris (Marlboro) sponsor Penske in the IRL so Ferrari have to cover their ads for Indy. I'm not sure about the rest of them but I'm sure it's a similar story

Epsilon · 28 Sep 2002, 00:24 (Ref:390287)

The US laws are that a tobacco company can only advertise in 1 sporting event/series. Marlboro can't advertise because they sponsor the Penske team in IRL. West can advertise, because they're basically unknown in the US and don't advertise anywhere else. Mild Seven can advertise (I think), and I'm pretty sure that B&H and Luckies can't.

Spritle · 28 Sep 2002, 00:53 (Ref:390295)

Thanks!

What a stupid law, I'm sure the kiddies urge to fire up a butt will cease immediately once they see that white rear wing on the rear of the Ferraris.

Epsilon · 28 Sep 2002, 01:35 (Ref:390304)

Exactly, that's how the tobacco makers try to defend their right to advertise. The goal of tobacco advertising is not to create new smokers, but to alter the brand loyalty of existing smokers. (said in some book I haven't read in ages)

Jay · 28 Sep 2002, 02:13 (Ref:390313)

I don't know... I thought that way for a while, but after seeing little enquiring at booths at Molson Indy Toronto that were selling Player's cigarettes, with big Players signs like on the cars, I'm not so sure...

Kids see the names on the cars, and then they see the same names on boxes of something and want to try whatever it is in that box...

I'm not saying I'm anti-tobacco ads in racing, I'm just saying that some things really make you think.

rpolinski · 28 Sep 2002, 03:11 (Ref:390326)

"Kids see the names on the cars, and then they see the same names on boxes of something and want to try whatever it is in that box... "

What a load of ****. I would love to see a car sponsored by a tampon company to see the confused looks on a lot of little boys faces. That's all I can right about this subject cause I'm starting to get the chuckles at the thought of kids running around with tampons hanging out their ears and noses.

Jay · 28 Sep 2002, 04:09 (Ref:390348)

Ok, you've got problems dude.

Jordi · 28 Sep 2002, 10:33 (Ref:390465)

It is all a bunch of bulls***. I have followed F1 with cars sponsored by tobacco companies since I was 8, but I've NEVER smoked. Problem is not sponsorship in cars, the problem of smoking is in everyone's mind...

If smoking is so bad sponsorship has to be prohibited, why not outlaw all the tobacco companies?

Speedworx · 28 Sep 2002, 16:50 (Ref:390601)

Marlboro can only have logos in IRL.

Lucky Strike can't be in F1, cos of Kool in CART.

http://www.f1-live.com/photos/2002/i.../diapo_222.jpg <- West is allowed.

http://www.f1-live.com/photos/2002/i...diapoa_117.jpg <- Mild Seven is allowed.

Not sure why B&H isn't allowed.

Armco Bender · 28 Sep 2002, 18:54 (Ref:390631)

Quote:

"Kids see the names on the cars, and then they see the same names on boxes of something and want to try whatever it is in that box... "

Rennen · 28 Sep 2002, 21:01 (Ref:390718)

You can restrict advertising...but not an industry Jordi!

They say we live in a "free country" (in the west) Let people choose I say!...stop telling us what we can and can't do! How did our parents get through the war anyhow!

JonesF1 · 29 Sep 2002, 04:25 (Ref:390863)

Quote:

Originally posted by Epsilon
Exactly, that's how the tobacco makers try to defend their right to advertise. The goal of tobacco advertising is not to create new smokers, but to alter the brand loyalty of existing smokers. (said in some book I haven't read in ages)

Correct. And it amazes me that beer advertising is bigger then ever. Tabacco money (lots of it) has been in racing for decades, almost as essential as the car manufacturers at one time. They made NASCAR what it is and many teams in many leagues all over the world have tabacoo companies as their main sponsors, more then any other industry.

Its a shame that politics are involved but a sham that more teams dont speak up.

El_Gibleto · 29 Sep 2002, 05:54 (Ref:390875)

The rights to the B&H brand in the usa are owned by Brown and Williamson Tobacco, the same company that owns the "Kool" and "Lucky Strike".

jiminee · 29 Sep 2002, 11:30 (Ref:391010)

I say go the way, take as much money off them as possible, think of it as a way of returning something to the community for all they take out.

429CJ · 29 Sep 2002, 16:26 (Ref:391220)

Actually BAR is looking quite good without Luckie's ads and large HONDA decals in side and rear wing. It looks like a real HONDA F1. Maybe a glimpse from future to come?

Jay · 29 Sep 2002, 16:39 (Ref:391226)

You realize the only reason tobacco companies have sponsored racing is because nobody else wants to take their dirty money (or it's been banned).

I'm not suggesting tobacco ads be banned, but if I were a team owner, I'd definately look at non-tobacco sponsorship first. If only tobacco guys stepped up, I guess I'd have to take it. And overall, I think losing the tobacco sponsors will be a good thing for our sport as we (some anyway, including myself) won't have to feel bad about promoting an industry that knowingly kills their customers.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
2006 Forum "Pick 'Em" - Indy 500 "Pole Day"	Tim Northcutt	IRL Indycar Series	13	14 May 2006 19:58
Forum's 2005 "Indy 500" RACE "Pick 'Em" Contest	Tim Northcutt	IRL Indycar Series	26	31 May 2005 08:36
Porsche to Return? "Open" or "Closed"? (merged)	JAG	Sportscar & GT Racing	54	1 Jun 2004 14:22
"Let Tracey Pass" Carpentier to crew "F### You"	sgjb	ChampCar World Series	30	3 Sep 2003 07:41
Jos "Dead Loss" Verstappen & Enrique "Not Piquet" Bernoldi	I Ate Yoko Ono	Formula One	16	9 Oct 2001 14:44