Williams RBS sponsorship

[garycat]

Has anything been said since the 'nationalisation' of the bank?

Are they going to have enough dosh for next year?

Am I, as a taxpayer, part owner of Williams now?

[jacobyte]

I see what you're getting at... but it's not a pool car, you know

[Cara Van Man]

I don't think it will affect the sponsorship.

I heard Brundle say something about the budget for sponsorship is set aside as part of their advertising budget which in itself is 'money making', so I'd imagine Williams will keep RBOS sponsorship.

Man Utd still have AIG sponsorship after similar happenings.

ETA: And no, you don't own the wheel nuts.

Edited by Cara Van Man on Wednesday 22 October 09:08

[german tony]

In as much as an Italian tax-payer is a part owner of Ferrari, yes.

[Muzzer]

I read somewhere that they're OK for next year but RBS will probably pull their sponsorship of both Williams and the Six Nations for 2010.

[Eric Mc]

german tony said:

In as much as an Italian tax-payer is a part owner of Ferrari, yes.

And the French taxpayer with Renault.

In fact, if you look at the various sponsors which have appeared over the years in F1, you will find that many were state or semi-state owned.

[garycat]

Perhaps TV Licensing wil be a major sponsor next year, so they can raise the money to pay Bernie.

[Roop]

I noticed the RBS placards all over at the Shanghai GP. HM Govt. sponsoring an event at a Chinese circuit. Who'd have thunk it.

[Derek Smith]

Sad though it is to even consider, I reckon FW and Patrick Head will be out of F1 before 2010. 7 drivers titles, 9 constructors, 113 GP wins, 125 poles. First GP win in 73, over 500 GP contested.

The FW/PH partnership is one of the greats in F1 GP racing. It will not be, it cannot be, the same after Williams goes. Williams is the team that has been longest in F1. Forget Ferrari. That's changed so many times that it's a newcomer this season. Williams is the granddaddy of them all. They will probably seel the team as a going concern but it will not be a Williams without him at the head (so to speak).

[Eric Mc]

I agree.

They are the last of the long line of British "gargiste" teams which date back to the days of Cooper, Connaught and early Lotus.

[freedman]

Derek Smith said:

Sad though it is to even consider, I reckon FW and Patrick Head will be out of F1 before 2010. 7 drivers titles, 9 constructors, 113 GP wins, 125 poles. First GP win in 73, over 500 GP contested.

First GP win in 1979, not 73

[Marc W]

Sponsors don't own a part of the team so we won't own part of williams through RBS being nationalised.

[Derek Smith]

freedman said:

Derek Smith said:

Sad though it is to even consider, I reckon FW and Patrick Head will be out of F1 before 2010. 7 drivers titles, 9 constructors, 113 GP wins, 125 poles. First GP win in 73, over 500 GP contested.

First GP win in 1979, not 73

Yes, sorry. Should have read First GP 1973: that's 35 years.

I've just looked up the driver at Silverstone: H. Ganley. I was there and still can't remember either the car or driver.

It's 503 GPs contested.

[MonkeyHanger]

garycat said:

Has anything been said since the 'nationalisation' of the bank?

Are they going to have enough dosh for next year?

Am I, as a taxpayer, part owner of Williams now?

No. Apart from the fact that RBS didn't own a stake in the team, it's likely that the sponsorship deal would have been paid up front, long before the current problems.

The same applies to the Northern Rock sponsorship of Newcastle Utd.

[BalhamLotus]

MonkeyHanger said:

garycat said:

Has anything been said since the 'nationalisation' of the bank?

Are they going to have enough dosh for next year?

Am I, as a taxpayer, part owner of Williams now?

No. Apart from the fact that RBS didn't own a stake in the team, it's likely that the sponsorship deal would have been paid up front, long before the current problems.

The same applies to the Northern Rock sponsorship of Newcastle Utd.

Probably not paid up front, but contractually tied with a contract which doesn't have a "all bets are off if we happened to get Nationalised" clause in it, which would mean the contract would have to be paid off if they didn't want to continue.

There's only one thing that would be bigger news than the government paying to sponsor an F1 team, and that would be the government paying to not sponsor it.

[MonkeyHanger]

BalhamLotus said:

Probably not paid up front, but contractually tied with a contract which doesn't have a "all bets are off if we happened to get Nationalised" clause in it, which would mean the contract would have to be paid off if they didn't want to continue.

The Northern Rock deal definitely was. As are a lot of Football shirt deals. I'd be surprised if F1 were different.

[bullies180]

nah the government will allow rbs to keep the sponsorship but instead of the rbs logo gordy will tell williams they have to have the labour rose on the car in the build up to another election

[Kinky]

There are many different ways that the sponsorship can be paid, at different terms, at different times.

Sure, for this season it's already done and dusted. Both race weekend and car signage will have been agreed and arranged months ago. Roll on Brazil

The key for next season will all depend on any contractual re-negotiations. RBS are already signed up for 2009, but it depends on their financial situation, and how they can pay (if it's even an issue).

Of course, it may not be an issue at all. I don't have the specific facts on the RBS contract, so all the above is pure speculation.

In my honest and personal opinion - I don't think anything will change with RBS.

Of course, there's also the Baugur group

And I think Petrobas has already gone, and Philips are extending their presence.

K

[Eric Mc]

Although Frank Williams was running a team from 1973, it wasn't really the modern Williams team. His original team was eventually sold on to Walter Wolf - who managed a GP win in 1977 (Jody Schecter - Monaco).

Frank had to start from scratch again with a new Williams team in 1976/77.

[cj_eds]

MonkeyHanger said:

BalhamLotus said:

Probably not paid up front, but contractually tied with a contract which doesn't have a "all bets are off if we happened to get Nationalised" clause in it, which would mean the contract would have to be paid off if they didn't want to continue.

The Northern Rock deal definitely was. As are a lot of Football shirt deals. I'd be surprised if F1 were different.

If Mike Ashley is to be believed then Northern Rock stumped up the cash up front because Freddie Shepherd needed it to cover other debts.

In the end of the day RBS, AIG, Northern Rock etc would argue they still need to advertise so will continue to spend cash on it. The question is whether they review the level they sponsor - and for example decide they'd rather plaster the F1 circuits with their adverts instead of the Williams car which doesn't get much TV coverage these days.