Spectoremg wrote:I've been dismayed over the years that for relatively little cash (in corporate terms) a big brand could go racing but none choose to.
Perhaps they just believe it's an unnecessary expense. Companies only get involved in F1 if they can get something out of it; sponsorship has long ceased to be just an exercise in brand awareness, and instead seek activation from the team they're affiliated with (and vice versa). For example, GlaxoSmithKline's partnership with McLaren doesn't just work from a standpoint of advertising Sensodyne toothpaste; there's a case study
here which describes how McLaren Applied Technologies helped to streamline GSK's factory processes, and in return GSK have assisted McLaren in the field of nutrition and welfare to ensure that their drivers are in peak physical condition.
If a big conglomerate were to go it alone, what would they gain? Let's think of the big companies, the multi-billion dollar firms.
- Google are in the field of driverless cars, and so F1's image wouldn't be something that they'd consider suitable.
- Microsoft are currently tied up with Renault, and value the partnership with an existing team to improve their data analytics and programming efficiency more than setting up their own team.
- Big car companies still live on the adage of "win on Sunday, sell on Monday". Clearly, other (cheaper) categories work for this ethos just as well.
- Fast food chains such as McDonalds or Burger King don't really integrate well with a sport known to trim away all excesses.
- The larger product manufacturers haven't determined a need to be involved in F1, and although they could just throw money at a team, what would be the point? The likes of Coca-Cola or Nestle don't need brand exposure.
The likes of Haas are involved because they recognise the need to expand the impact of the business into Europe, where Haas Automation isn't such a big player in the CNC machine market. Whether any more businesses with similar intent exist, I don't know.