The pinnacle of motorsport. A playground for rich white dudes. The quintessential combination of thrill and speed. Since its inception in 1950, the Formula One community has had a reputation for being the dangerous playground of the wealthiest one-percent. 

Consequently, running a Formula 1 team requires an exorbitant amount of money. A single Formula One car costs over 12 million dollars. With 10 teams typically spending over 140 million dollars to travel across the oceans every weekend to the most luxurious racetracks around the globe, sufficient financial support could determine the success of certain teams. Thus, teams rely on sponsorships, often shady sponsors, to provide financial stability for their season. 

In 2021, F1 became the world’s second most viewed sporting organization, with viewership reaching nearly 1.5 billion people. With the logos of sponsors painted on speeding F1 cars zooming around in circles for hours, a F1 car’s livery advertisements presents itself to companies as a good way to seek increased media presence and publicity. Thus, with both F1 teams seeking funding and shady companies seeking advertising, sponsorships often create a mutually beneficial relationship between collaborating parties. 

How it all began

F1 liveries were never plastered with colorful sponsors until the early 1960s. In prior years, the chassis of Grand Prix cars often represented the national colors of the team’s country of origin. However, in 1968,  petroleum companies, such as Shell and British Petrol (BP), and official tyre sponsor Firestone withdrew their financial support from F1. Thus, with racing teams facing increased financial burdens, F1’s governing regulatory body, the Federation Interacional d’Automotiv (FIA), legalized commercial sponsorships. The change of policy opened the financial floodgates of F1 to outside businesses and foreign stakeholders. 

In the 1968 Monaco Grand Prix, Team Lotus were the first to unveil a sponsor-driven livery- their Black and Gold, Gold Leaf livery, sponsored by cigarette company Imperial Tobacco. Other teams quickly followed suit, such as Ferrari, with its iconic Marlboro livery. The newly designed livery abandoned all previous minimalist livery designs and set future precedents on the F1 community: Traditional, national colored liveries would be replaced by commercial sponsorships. Moreover, tobaccos companies would become a key player in the F1 sponsorships for the rest of Formula 1 history.  

If there is a will, there is a way

While tobacco conglomerates sitting on their ginormous mountain of money, the outside world quickly realized the danger of widespread tobacco advertising- the world’s most lucrative, cancer-causing industry. In 2003, FIA followed the EU Tobacco Advertising Directive to ban tobacco advertising, such as removing the names of Tobacco companies on the external design of cars. However, the FIA’s ban on tobacco advertising did not stop tobacco companies from gaining F1 exposure. 

In 2017, Ferrari introduced the infamous “barcode”- Marlboro livery. From a standstill, the chassis of looks like a random pattern of black, white, and red lines. However, when the car is driven at high speeds, the barcode blurs and softens into resembling the Marlboro’s original logo. This ingenious  livery design was technically legal since it did not actively promote the name of any tobacco manufacturer. On the contrary, Ferrari’s barcode design resulted in increased media attention towards the tobacco industry, and showed the FIA that tobacco companies are here to stay.

In 2010, Ferrari finally officially removed the Marlboro “barcode” design prior to the Spanish Grand Prix due to continued complaints from the FIA. However, during the 2018 Japanese Grand Prix, Phillip Morris (Marlboro’s parent company) reappeared on the sport headlines when F1 fans noticed a foreign sponsor on the Ferrari chassis: Mission Winnow. 

Fans around the world were confused. What company is Mission Winnow? Why has no one heard of them before? How could an unknown company have such a major spot on one of the largest F1 constructor’s chassis? 

Turns out, Mission Winnow is a subsidiary of the tobacco company Phillip Morris International, owner of Marlboro. On their website, Mission Winnow’s mission statement is “to create engagement around the role of science, technology and innovation as a powerful force for good in any industry”. These vague terms created doubt amongst the F1 community as Mission Winnow has not produced any tangible service or product since its inception into the sport. As a result, the controversy turned heads toward Phillip Morris International and the tobacco industry once again. 

With both Mission Winnow and the “barcode” livery, Phillip Morris used ‘smoke-screen marketing’, a business tool aimed to increase publicity by utilizing one medium with a hidden, underlying intention to divert attention to another. This type of alibi marketing typically results in “unwanted” attention brought upon by controversy. But for tobacco companies who are already making millions off cancer-causing diseases, perhaps there is no such thing as “bad publicity.”

Fake Drinks?

Shady sponsorships have not left F1. The most recent famous sponsor scandal involved energy drink company, Rich Energy, whom sponsored the American F1 team, Haas. Relatively new to the sport, Haas’ performance has always been challenged by its limited budget capacity. In 2019, Haas had a collective budget of 173 million, while top teams such as Mercedes AMG-Petronas and Red Bull each had 484 and 463 million dollars respectively to spend in developing their car. However, Haas’ 2019 season turned around when Rich Energy invested 60 million pounds into the American F1 team.  

While Haas did unveil a brand new black livery for the 2019 season, nobody seemed to have ever tasted a Rich Energy before. Their product was non-existent. When CEO of Rich Energy, William Storey, was questioned about the legitamacy of his company, he commented that doubting the existence of his company "is like saying man never walked on the moon, or Elvis is still alive. Haas team principal Guenter Steiner stated, "Obviously we did what we needed to do, and our legal advisers were content with that,” suggesting that sponsorship by Rich Energy was decided purely out of desperation and lack of financial resources to keep Haas afloat. 

Soon after, leaked bank statements of Rich Energy confirmed that they only had 581 pounds in their bank account. On June 10, 2019, Storey went suddenly terminated Rich Energy’s contract with Haas on a twitter post without informing both Haas or other employees at Rich Energy. This then set off an internal conflict within Rich Energy, leading to the removal of CEO Storey from the company due to his “rogue” actions. 

So, how did this mysterious energy drink company acquire 65 million pounds? How does a F1 team sponsor have less than 800 dollars in their bank account? Why did Storey randomly terminate their contract with Haas? I guess we’ll never know. 

Who really wins?

Looking on its past history, the dark world of F1 sponsorships have definitely given way to “immoral” and illegitimate companies. While legitimizing substandard companies through official F1 sponsorship and endorsement would be a “moral” sin on many legal grounds, no party is truly harmed by an additional paint job, featuring a tiny logo somewhere on a racing car. Tobacco ads rarely actually promote viewers to start smoking, and a non-existent energy drink product could do even less harm.

On the contrary, sponsorship design livery have evolved into a fundamental element of the sport. Imagine watching barren race cars zooming down the straights of Silverstone. Could fans imagine racing legends Alan Prost and Aryton Senna’s famous 1989 crash in Japan without the iconic Marlboro livery? Fans, like myself, would argue that the Grand Prix cars would never be the same without the Post Malone tattoo - style advertisements plastered all over F1 cars, zooming across the chicanes of Monaco.  

With that angle, in the grand scheme of things, what harm are few shady companies offering a few dollars slighting alleviating the yolk and burden F1 teams face when scrambling for money? From that perspective, I guess they’re not that bad after all.