|
A few things. To be honest I think non-tobacco sponsorship attracts more attention than tobacco sponsorship. Eg. I wait every year for the non-tobacco F1 events to see what Jordan can come up with. I remember Hockenheim 1997, when I first saw "Fissssssi" and I thought it was brilliant. Because there is no clear line, and one week we have it, the next we don't, it attracts more attention. From the PC side, would it not be better to either have full tobacco sponsorship evrywehre, or none anywhere - having a bit of both, just 'increases' the expsosure.
Secondly. Tobacco sponsorship doesn't make you go out and buy cigarettes. I 'support' Marlboro as a company, simply because I feel that they have put a lot of money into motor sport over the years, and I applaud them for that (even if their reasons aren't equal with mine) but I don't smoke, and it doesn't make me want to smoke! But, they could maybe have tempted me to buy their goods over other ones should I have chosen to smoke.
Thirdly. I don't think people should try to stop people from smoking. In public places, perhaps, try and discourage those to stop smoking around non-smokers. But as far as it goes, so long as people are AWARE of what it can do to them, let them do what they like. If they are intelligent enough to make that decision, good luck to them (ok, that doesn't apply so much to kids but...)
Fourthly. When I was a kid, I thought Marlboro McLaren was just a name. I didn't know what Marlboro was - I thought it was like, say, Escort in Ford Escort. McLaren made the car, Marlboro was it's name. Now maybe if they'd changed to bigger sponsorship of another team I might have realised they were something else, but I swear I never knew what they were!!
Finally, at the British GP this year, I was surprised that the MarlboroF1 signs (sorry, I'm not trying to sell them here, but they seem to be very good for examples!! - guess it shows how much money goes in!!) were still present on a few corners. So, let me get this straight - we weren't allowed to read the names on the cars (but could buy magazines with pictures of them with tobacco sponsorship on, in!!) but we could also read the lovely signs with tobacco sponsorship on. I always found it ironic as well, that F1 cars could run tobacco logos at testing at Silverstone, but not in the grand prix....
Inconsistent sponsorship... Advertising works though I think, but only to sell your product. A non-smoker isn't going to buy cigs if they aren't gonna smoke them. And kids, IMO, are more likely to try and be like Michael Schumacher, than some logo on the side of his car...
|