McLaren lose Tag Heuer
Discussion
Hub said:
In terms of finances, is there much point in them having two very expensive drivers at the moment? Or are their salaries just a drop in the ocean? A couple of fresh young pay drivers would achieve similar results!
The word was that McLaren always made the engine provider pay half of the drivers salary, that might be different with Honda as maybe they are paying for all of it due to any performance clauses they have brokenIt looks stupid doesn't it? To think that around this time last year we were wondering who would partner Alonso on his top-tier salary. It may as well have been who best to partner Magnussen, what a total waste of talent.
I'm sure Alonso is crying into his mega millions, but I do wonder what it must do to your motivation when you're in your autumn years watching Saubers drive away from you. I hope for F1's sake McLaren can turn this around next year.
I'm sure Alonso is crying into his mega millions, but I do wonder what it must do to your motivation when you're in your autumn years watching Saubers drive away from you. I hope for F1's sake McLaren can turn this around next year.
REALIST123 said:
I'm not sure you guys are serious? Does anyone buy an expensive item partly because of its association with another brand? Really?
There was no direct association with any specific brand that made me want one, just the general motorsport association. There is now a brand association that means I am much less inclined to want one. On a more general more, if there wasn't an association between brands and sports teams making people want to purchase there would almost certainly be no sponsorship, it can be very effective if used well.
paulyv said:
n3il123 said:
andyps said:
As part of LVMH the TAG Heuer brand is moving from McLaren but another of their brands - Moet Hennessy - have recently joined them. So LVMH have not lost faith in McLaren.
What it has done for me though is make a TAG Heuer less desirable. For as long as I can remember I have wanted one and have recently been saving to get one (as something essentially frivolous I can't justify the spend any other way than a bit each month) but suddenly I'm not sure I want one any more. The fit of a luxury product with a fizzy drink just doesn't work for me, with the association being all wrong. With the smart watch TAG Heuer have announced I can see there being some merit to trying to appeal to a younger demographic which may be the case with Red Bull, and I'm not in that sector so maybe they don't care about me. In which case, I don't need to care about them.
I got mine as I had always aspired to one from the days of Ayrton Senna and Mclaren.What it has done for me though is make a TAG Heuer less desirable. For as long as I can remember I have wanted one and have recently been saving to get one (as something essentially frivolous I can't justify the spend any other way than a bit each month) but suddenly I'm not sure I want one any more. The fit of a luxury product with a fizzy drink just doesn't work for me, with the association being all wrong. With the smart watch TAG Heuer have announced I can see there being some merit to trying to appeal to a younger demographic which may be the case with Red Bull, and I'm not in that sector so maybe they don't care about me. In which case, I don't need to care about them.
I was only young at the time Ferrari were with Heuer, and then Lauda in the mid 70's. Then TAG 'did' the McLaren Porsche engines which I always thought were cool.
Of course, having Senna (and Berger) with the TAG Heuer logo on the tiny windscreens of the 1990 F1 cars did meant I could 'buy into' F1 so to speak. The fact was it was an expensive watch when I bought mine, nobody else had one and it was different, and still is over 20 years later. Not something advertised either, other than on the F1 cars.
Wear it every day and it is nice to be reminded of Lauda, Prost, Senna but not in a shouty way. It is special to me and nobody else.
Not keen at all on modern TAG Heuer products though and not even interested. Mass produced and far too much advertising kills it for me.
Watches are too blingy now. I'm getting old.
Santander extend their McLaren sponsorship through to 2020 - http://www.crash.net/f1/news/225701/1/mclaren-rene...
reeventu said:
I would really buy a watch based on quality , what i can afford and what I like and not on whose overalls the log is stitched onto.I haven't seem many REAL quality watch names on race suits !
Have a look at the watch thread and get some good advice
Thanks for your advice, however I am talking 15- 20 years ago, I am sure both watch quality and my susceptibility to marketing have both changed in that time.Have a look at the watch thread and get some good advice
Oh and the Tag is still going strong despite having been worn every day since purchase (15 odd years ago).
no criticism of TAG intended or implied, just think advertising/ marketing of any sort needs to be treated with care..
Always best to seek advice ( as impersonal as possible ) before making any purchase.
Watches are very individual and I really have trouble identifying quality rather than size of advertising budget
reeventu said:
no criticism of TAG intended or implied, just think advertising/ marketing of any sort needs to be treated with care..
Always best to seek advice ( as impersonal as possible ) before making any purchase.
Watches are very individual and I really have trouble identifying quality rather than size of advertising budget
I have read a few things about watches and quality which are interesting - I would need to read more before committing a significant amount to purchase one. However, I'm also a marketer so do understand the impact good promotion can have on things, and how people are all susceptible to it - whether they acknowledge it or not. Interestingly, some research showed that the people most susceptible to brand and likely to buy branded products are marketers - even though we understand what happens and how we still buy into the hype more than anyone else!Always best to seek advice ( as impersonal as possible ) before making any purchase.
Watches are very individual and I really have trouble identifying quality rather than size of advertising budget
But at the end of the day if you like something and think it represents value to you at whatever price it is and for whatever other reasons then isn't that OK?
andyps said:
reeventu said:
no criticism of TAG intended or implied, just think advertising/ marketing of any sort needs to be treated with care..
Always best to seek advice ( as impersonal as possible ) before making any purchase.
Watches are very individual and I really have trouble identifying quality rather than size of advertising budget
I have read a few things about watches and quality which are interesting - I would need to read more before committing a significant amount to purchase one. However, I'm also a marketer so do understand the impact good promotion can have on things, and how people are all susceptible to it - whether they acknowledge it or not. Interestingly, some research showed that the people most susceptible to brand and likely to buy branded products are marketers - even though we understand what happens and how we still buy into the hype more than anyone else!Always best to seek advice ( as impersonal as possible ) before making any purchase.
Watches are very individual and I really have trouble identifying quality rather than size of advertising budget
But at the end of the day if you like something and think it represents value to you at whatever price it is and for whatever other reasons then isn't that OK?
I am befuddled by that sort of thing. I buy suff generally based on requirements versus specifications, and "Shiny" is never one of those specifications.
I suppose I'm not the target market.
I think, almost by definition, a luxury product offers poor practical utility value compared to cost. The high utility/cost ratio of the cheapest Casio marks it out as the opposite of a luxury product.
Luxury products do seem to offer some kind of social utility in certain groups, so I guess when deciding which watch to spunk £X000 on, the opinions of others might count for a lot, which is what marketing is all about I guess.
Luxury products do seem to offer some kind of social utility in certain groups, so I guess when deciding which watch to spunk £X000 on, the opinions of others might count for a lot, which is what marketing is all about I guess.
It is funny but F1 is now dominated by Rolex.....you see their name on every corner of every circuit and Bernie who controls the TV coverage everywhere other than I believe Japan and Monaco, concentrates on the corporate f1 backers not the on car backers.
TAG Heuer now with LVMH uses so many different people to 'promote' watches, from Leonardo Di Caprio to Maria Sharapova, numerous models and other personalities. Their association with F1 is pretty weak if you ask the person on the street.
They did not pay much with McLaren for the space, the team all got an F1 watch and they were allowed to buy one or two at a discount, but the relationship was more linked to TAG than LVMH. Once TAG sold the brand for an enormous profit the relationship was always on rocky ground.
McLaren will find another watch company but I would not wish to go up against Rolex who like it or not select their brand ambassadors very carefully, Jackie Steward, Roger Federer and some very elegant boating, horse and arts sponsorships.
Between them, Swatch Group, Richemont and Rolex account for 45.8% of the global watch market. This percentage has increased since 2011, as these three companies have taken market share from the next largest companies. Fossil (USA) takes fourth place, beating LVMH, which had made it to the top of the rankings the previous year thanks to its acquisition of Italian jewelry house and watch manufacturer Bulgari. The three largest Japanese watch manufacturers (Citizen, Seiko and Casio) together represent 9.4% of market share – less than that of Rolex alone.
So McLaren have lost a name and maybe $2,000,000 per annum, maybe less but I am sure they are woking hard on other premium names who wish for a slice of the F1 action and a link to the McLaren 'black book'. Maybe Ralph Lauren or Piaget?
TAG Heuer are chasing a youthful 'Asian' market today and the Red Bull link works with their target market, but will these potential Asian consumers follow F1....I think not.
TAG Heuer now with LVMH uses so many different people to 'promote' watches, from Leonardo Di Caprio to Maria Sharapova, numerous models and other personalities. Their association with F1 is pretty weak if you ask the person on the street.
They did not pay much with McLaren for the space, the team all got an F1 watch and they were allowed to buy one or two at a discount, but the relationship was more linked to TAG than LVMH. Once TAG sold the brand for an enormous profit the relationship was always on rocky ground.
McLaren will find another watch company but I would not wish to go up against Rolex who like it or not select their brand ambassadors very carefully, Jackie Steward, Roger Federer and some very elegant boating, horse and arts sponsorships.
Between them, Swatch Group, Richemont and Rolex account for 45.8% of the global watch market. This percentage has increased since 2011, as these three companies have taken market share from the next largest companies. Fossil (USA) takes fourth place, beating LVMH, which had made it to the top of the rankings the previous year thanks to its acquisition of Italian jewelry house and watch manufacturer Bulgari. The three largest Japanese watch manufacturers (Citizen, Seiko and Casio) together represent 9.4% of market share – less than that of Rolex alone.
So McLaren have lost a name and maybe $2,000,000 per annum, maybe less but I am sure they are woking hard on other premium names who wish for a slice of the F1 action and a link to the McLaren 'black book'. Maybe Ralph Lauren or Piaget?
TAG Heuer are chasing a youthful 'Asian' market today and the Red Bull link works with their target market, but will these potential Asian consumers follow F1....I think not.
AndStilliRise said:
Ron Dennis is probably still demanding a premium for coming last but one in the constructors. Still they have 2 world champions driving their bag of bolts. I can't see the logic in all honesty.
The premium brands in F1 are usually the ones close to the front, when you are scrapping for race completions - how can your marketing support designer brands paying big bucks. If RD had reduced his marketing model he may have still kept Tag & Boss due to brand longevity.
Makes little sense.
We'll see. Ron's been at this a lot longer than most of us on here have been alive.The premium brands in F1 are usually the ones close to the front, when you are scrapping for race completions - how can your marketing support designer brands paying big bucks. If RD had reduced his marketing model he may have still kept Tag & Boss due to brand longevity.
Makes little sense.
belleair302 said:
It is funny but F1 is now dominated by Rolex.....you see their name on every corner of every circuit and Bernie who controls the TV coverage everywhere other than I believe Japan and Monaco, concentrates on the corporate f1 backers not the on car backers.
TAG Heuer now with LVMH uses so many different people to 'promote' watches, from Leonardo Di Caprio to Maria Sharapova, numerous models and other personalities. Their association with F1 is pretty weak if you ask the person on the street.
They did not pay much with McLaren for the space, the team all got an F1 watch and they were allowed to buy one or two at a discount, but the relationship was more linked to TAG than LVMH. Once TAG sold the brand for an enormous profit the relationship was always on rocky ground.
McLaren will find another watch company but I would not wish to go up against Rolex who like it or not select their brand ambassadors very carefully, Jackie Steward, Roger Federer and some very elegant boating, horse and arts sponsorships.
Between them, Swatch Group, Richemont and Rolex account for 45.8% of the global watch market. This percentage has increased since 2011, as these three companies have taken market share from the next largest companies. Fossil (USA) takes fourth place, beating LVMH, which had made it to the top of the rankings the previous year thanks to its acquisition of Italian jewelry house and watch manufacturer Bulgari. The three largest Japanese watch manufacturers (Citizen, Seiko and Casio) together represent 9.4% of market share – less than that of Rolex alone.
So McLaren have lost a name and maybe $2,000,000 per annum, maybe less but I am sure they are woking hard on other premium names who wish for a slice of the F1 action and a link to the McLaren 'black book'. Maybe Ralph Lauren or Piaget?
TAG Heuer are chasing a youthful 'Asian' market today and the Red Bull link works with their target market, but will these potential Asian consumers follow F1....I think not.
Rolex have also announced they are going to extend their partnership with the ACO and Le Mans, so they continue to grow their motorsport visability.TAG Heuer now with LVMH uses so many different people to 'promote' watches, from Leonardo Di Caprio to Maria Sharapova, numerous models and other personalities. Their association with F1 is pretty weak if you ask the person on the street.
They did not pay much with McLaren for the space, the team all got an F1 watch and they were allowed to buy one or two at a discount, but the relationship was more linked to TAG than LVMH. Once TAG sold the brand for an enormous profit the relationship was always on rocky ground.
McLaren will find another watch company but I would not wish to go up against Rolex who like it or not select their brand ambassadors very carefully, Jackie Steward, Roger Federer and some very elegant boating, horse and arts sponsorships.
Between them, Swatch Group, Richemont and Rolex account for 45.8% of the global watch market. This percentage has increased since 2011, as these three companies have taken market share from the next largest companies. Fossil (USA) takes fourth place, beating LVMH, which had made it to the top of the rankings the previous year thanks to its acquisition of Italian jewelry house and watch manufacturer Bulgari. The three largest Japanese watch manufacturers (Citizen, Seiko and Casio) together represent 9.4% of market share – less than that of Rolex alone.
So McLaren have lost a name and maybe $2,000,000 per annum, maybe less but I am sure they are woking hard on other premium names who wish for a slice of the F1 action and a link to the McLaren 'black book'. Maybe Ralph Lauren or Piaget?
TAG Heuer are chasing a youthful 'Asian' market today and the Red Bull link works with their target market, but will these potential Asian consumers follow F1....I think not.
Now that TAG are going to Red Bull you have to wonder how much they are paying for the 'TAG Engine' deal. They lose the money from Renault/Infinity which was reportedly worth $30,000,000. I doubt that TAG would pay that much.
sirtyro said:
Rolex have also announced they are going to extend their partnership with the ACO and Le Mans, so they continue to grow their motorsport visability.
Now that TAG are going to Red Bull you have to wonder how much they are paying for the 'TAG Engine' deal. They lose the money from Renault/Infinity which was reportedly worth $30,000,000. I doubt that TAG would pay that much.
It's quite tricky because TAG Heuer is an LVMH brand and doesn't report separately from the other LVMH watch brands (it reports on the same sheet as Hublot for example, who are sponsors of Ferrari).Now that TAG are going to Red Bull you have to wonder how much they are paying for the 'TAG Engine' deal. They lose the money from Renault/Infinity which was reportedly worth $30,000,000. I doubt that TAG would pay that much.
From a financials point of view, those two brands are the same company.
It'd be great to know what Tag's revenue and profits were, so we could figure out what they've been giving McLaren for years, along with what they might be able to give to RBR.
sirtyro said:
Hub said:
In terms of finances, is there much point in them having two very expensive drivers at the moment? Or are their salaries just a drop in the ocean? A couple of fresh young pay drivers would achieve similar results!
The word was that McLaren always made the engine provider pay half of the drivers salary, that might be different with Honda as maybe they are paying for all of it due to any performance clauses they have brokenMcLarens sponsorship in 2016 will be significantly higher than last year and their car division is going very well.On 3rd December they announced a new car the McLaren 675LT that costs £285,450 limited to 500 cars and have sold out.My educated guess is that from selling the 500 cars they will make £40 million profit.
btcc123 said:
Honda have agreed from the beginning to pay for all costs of the engine,pay half of both drivers salaries and to give McLaren $100 million a year.
McLarens sponsorship in 2016 will be significantly higher than last year and their car division is going very well.On 3rd December they announced a new car the McLaren 675LT that costs £285,450 limited to 500 cars and have sold out.My educated guess is that from selling the 500 cars they will make £40 million profit.
I'm not sure that I believe the "$100 million a year" from Honda rumour and unless someone has a copy of the contract we won't even be able to guess at the value until McLaren's accounts for 2015 are published.McLarens sponsorship in 2016 will be significantly higher than last year and their car division is going very well.On 3rd December they announced a new car the McLaren 675LT that costs £285,450 limited to 500 cars and have sold out.My educated guess is that from selling the 500 cars they will make £40 million profit.
The performance of the automotive business is irrelevant. McLaren only own 3.7% of it.
ralphrj said:
btcc123 said:
Honda have agreed from the beginning to pay for all costs of the engine,pay half of both drivers salaries and to give McLaren $100 million a year.
McLarens sponsorship in 2016 will be significantly higher than last year and their car division is going very well.On 3rd December they announced a new car the McLaren 675LT that costs £285,450 limited to 500 cars and have sold out.My educated guess is that from selling the 500 cars they will make £40 million profit.
I'm not sure that I believe the "$100 million a year" from Honda rumour and unless someone has a copy of the contract we won't even be able to guess at the value until McLaren's accounts for 2015 are published.McLarens sponsorship in 2016 will be significantly higher than last year and their car division is going very well.On 3rd December they announced a new car the McLaren 675LT that costs £285,450 limited to 500 cars and have sold out.My educated guess is that from selling the 500 cars they will make £40 million profit.
The performance of the automotive business is irrelevant. McLaren only own 3.7% of it.
McLaren Automotive/Parent organization
Image result for who owns mclaren
McLaren Technology Group
The McLaren Technology Group, based at the McLaren Technology Centre in Woking, Surrey, United Kingdom, is a British group of companies created by Ron Dennis. Wikipedia
Headquarters: Woking
CEO: Ron Dennis
Founder: Ron Dennis
Founded: 1985
Owners: The Bahrain royal family's Mumtalakat investment company owns 50% of McLaren Group and Ron Dennis owns 25%. His business partner Mansour Ojjeh owns the remaining 25%.
Subsidiaries: McLaren, McLaren Automotive, McLaren Applied Technologies
Edited by btcc123 on Tuesday 22 December 19:19
btcc123 said:
It looks like McLaren Technology Group owns McLaren F1 Team, McLaren Automotive and McLaren Applied Technologies
Whilst McLaren Technology Group may own McLaren Racing (the F1 team) and McLaren Applied Technologies outright they only own a very small share in McLaren Automotive. This is a matter of public record (the annual return made by McLaren to Companies House on 7th October 2015).ralphrj said:
Whilst McLaren Technology Group may own McLaren Racing (the F1 team) and McLaren Applied Technologies outright they only own a very small share in McLaren Automotive. This is a matter of public record (the annual return made by McLaren to Companies House on 7th October 2015).
I think the £100m a year been twisted. Honda gave them a large advance to build this years car, the plan was to return with glory which sadly didn't happen. So i believe the figure but i think it was a one off. No doubt Honda will pay McLaren a sum of money each year going forward but i would expect it to be be 1/2 the figure.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff