8 replies to this topic

[curtegerer]

When and where did the practice of removing tobacco logos from F1 cars start? Specifically, did the 1977 Marlboro McLaren M23 and the 1978 JPS Lotus ever run in no-smoking livery?? I've got some conflicting information on this subject, some suggesting this started in the mid-70's in some countries. My own recollection says it wasn't until the early 1980's???? -- Curt

[Rob29]

1968-British GP I think. BBC refused to cover it until the John Player sailor device was removed from the Lotuses. A black patch( later a Union Jack) covered it.The 'Gold Leaf Team Lotus' was OK as this was the team name!

[jarama]

curtegerer,

the first time I remember of tobacco logos being removed was for the German GP '75, held at the old Nürburgring.

Carles.

[Roger Clark]

THere was no tobacco advertising on the cars in"Der Kleiner Preis von Deutschland", 1977.

[curtegerer]

Thanks guys. If anyone has photos of these early 'no-smokers', please post. Thanks. -- Curt

[Rainer Nyberg]

Here are a few examples from the 1970s ;


John Watson at the German GP in 1975, 'JPS' was ok, but not 'John Player Special'.


Jochen Mass at the German GP in 1976, Marlboro chevron was ok, but not 'Marlboro'.


James Hunt at the German GP in 1978, Marlboro lettering omitted.


Mario Andretti at the British GP in 1978, all reference to John Player now removed, exept the black and golden colors.

[curtegerer]

Excellent! Thank you very much. -- Curt

[Bernd]

It goe back a lot further than you'd think I can tell you. In early 1968 after Lotus painted the 49's in the Gold Leaf Livery and completed the NZ rounds of the Tasman Series they came over to Australia. The Governing Body took exception to the Livery and barred the cars from practice at Surfers. Lotus got around this by putting race tape over the Players Sailor on the cars, after further clarification the cars were allowed to run uncovered.

[Gary Davies]

Rainer's wonderful pictures and Bernd's anecdote evoke the awful hand-wringing agonies through which the "authorities" have been putting themselves on the cigarette advertising issue over all these years.

Their (the authorities, that is!) laughable misunderstanding of how branding and visual imagery works is demonstrated by such absurdities as covering over the sailor.

I recall a year or two ago reading about a rumour that Coca-Cola were going to be the main sponsor of Toyota's F-1 effort. The reason (hah!) cited was that their corporate livery was of similar colours to Toyota's. Coke, when questioned about this responded, IIRC, that the primary demographic of Formula One was significantly older than their primary demographic and so, it follows, they would not get optimum bang for their buck from Formula One.

If that is correct (and it seems logical to me) then it follows that the majority of Formula One followers are beyond the point when peer pressure and hormones are tempting them to take up smoking.

So perhaps the presence of cigarette sponsorship of Formula One really is about brand switching rather than taking up the habit in the first place. And perhaps the fate of Spa is all about money and nothing to do with principles ... erm, sorry, we knew that all along ;)

At risk at really going out on a limb, is it in any way relevant to observe that vodka was extremely, nay harmfully, popular with the Workers of the USSR at a time way before The Central Committee would have any truck with advertising.;)


Vanwall, a lifelong non-smoker.