BMW say no to MotoGP

Austin said:

I'm thrilled with their contribution to the sport. The Rookies Cup is a fantastic idea, and the support for Stoner, Pedrosa, Dovi, Aoyama, Marquez, and all the rest is wonderful. I meant more along the lines of running a team in the top flight. The Stoner rumor, was that for the 2011 season? Because I wondered what happened to that rumor. There was also the rumor of the Red Bull Ducati team that would run Michelin rubber rumored for 2009 to prolong the tire war. And the rumor of them pairing with Team KR for 2008 (?).



I'm glad I get the opportunity to ask you this because as some here know I am very, VERY loyal to Red Bull, but I get the impression that they're not interested in coming back into MotoGP unless they get control of a team in the way they run their F1 team. Total control. Is that more or less accurate?

Click to expand...

Why be loyal to a product? What have they done for you? They'll pull the plug on motorsports in seconds if they think that makes better commercial sense. Product loyalty is marginally less wise than loyalty to an employer. At least an employer pays you, rather than the other way round.



My apologies for the rant, but MotoGP's reliance on vastly overpriced sugar water is incredibly dangerous. Once energy drinks go out of fashion (and they will), then we're ......, unless motorcycle racing starts looking for wider support.



As for total control, I'm not sure. I know that Mateschitz likes to have his hand on the tiller, but I think it is also just a question of money. They don't want to sink money into a team without guarantees of success.

Geonerd said:

Given how outrageously expensive Eff Wun is, their continued absence from MotoGP doesn't say good things about the perceived value of bike racing.

Click to expand...

I think it has to do with control. Red Bull don't race satellite equipment, and they don't beg for factory spec. They have to be in control of nearly every aspect of the competitiveness or they don't race. Suppose CRT are competitive. Red Bull would probably enter MotoGP b/c they would be in complete control of a CRT machine.

Kropotkin said:

Why be loyal to a product? What have they done for you? They'll pull the plug on motorsports in seconds if they think that makes better commercial sense. Product loyalty is marginally less wise than loyalty to an employer. At least an employer pays you, rather than the other way round.



My apologies for the rant, but MotoGP's reliance on vastly overpriced sugar water is incredibly dangerous. Once energy drinks go out of fashion (and they will), then we're ......, unless motorcycle racing starts looking for wider support.



As for total control, I'm not sure. I know that Mateschitz likes to have his hand on the tiller, but I think it is also just a question of money. They don't want to sink money into a team without guarantees of success.

Click to expand...

I agree that it's only a matter of time before the energy drink fad fades away and then the sport will have to find another means to secure sponsorship. But for the moment, that's where the money is at. And Red Bull have been in the game awhile, and I appreciate the backing they've given to the sport, and to F1, and to individual athletes all over the world. And then you get into great consumer-oriented events they promote like Flugtag, or Art of the Can, or Soap Box Races, or Air Races, etc. I like what they do. And as long as they continue to support endeavors that intrigue me, I'll continue to choose their product when I'm in the mood for an energy drink. And nobody pays me at the moment, anyways. I'm my own boss, and Red Bull is the official energy drink supplier to my one-man operation.



But in all seriousness, and it's a point that's been made a lot in the past few months, MotoGP needs to explore other backers of the sport. We've been in trouble since the tobacco money went away, luckily some of this cash has rolled in. But as you said, it won't last forever. The powers that be seem content with the money being brought in from tobacco, or Rossi, or energy drinks, and don't seem too terribly bothered to find anything more. As your Money Situation article points out, the vast difference between profits in F1 compared to MotoGP is frightening.

Austin said:

I agree that it's only a matter of time before the energy drink fad fades away and then the sport will have to find another means to secure sponsorship. But for the moment, that's where the money is at. And Red Bull have been in the game awhile, and I appreciate the backing they've given to the sport, and to F1, and to individual athletes all over the world. And then you get into great consumer-oriented events they promote like Flugtag, or Art of the Can, or Soap Box Races, or Air Races, etc. I like what they do. And as long as they continue to support endeavors that intrigue me, I'll continue to choose their product when I'm in the mood for an energy drink. And nobody pays me at the moment, anyways. I'm my own boss, and Red Bull is the official energy drink supplier to my one-man operation.

But in all seriousness, and it's a point that's been made a lot in the past few months, MotoGP needs to explore other backers of the sport. We've been in trouble since the tobacco money went away, luckily some of this cash has rolled in. But as you said, it won't last forever. The powers that be seem content with the money being brought in from tobacco, or Rossi, or energy drinks, and don't seem too terribly bothered to find anything more. As your Money Situation article points out, the vast difference between profits in F1 compared to MotoGP is frightening.

Click to expand...

Not meant as an attack, and I know just how brilliant Red Bull are at using sporting events to promote their brand. All I wanted to do was to point out that brand loyalty is the most foolish of loyalties. After all, you are paying money for product A, and if product B should turn out to be cheaper/better/more versatile, then you'd be a fool to stick with brand A. The only thing that a brand can give you is a sense of self-worth, and given that it is your own psyche that is deriving that sense of self-worth from a brand, it is you doing all the hard work, not the brand.



I suppose I sound like a ....... long-haired sandal-wearing nursery-school teaching wishy-washy namby-pamby pinko liberal lefty hippy commie socialist, but in fact I am merely pointing out the economic disadvantages of brand loyalty. You are paying a premium for an intangible benefit, and I like my benefits tangible.

Kropotkin said:

BTW, I also heard a rumor that Red Bull turned down the opportunity to run Casey Stoner in a 1-man Honda team in 2010 ...

Click to expand...

I bet they're kicking themselves in the ... for that one.

Kropotkin said:

My apologies for the rant, but MotoGP's reliance on vastly overpriced sugar water is incredibly dangerous. Once energy drinks go out of fashion (and they will), then we're ......, unless motorcycle racing starts looking for wider support.

Click to expand...

Why would energy drinks go out of fashion? Are they not like coffee, tea, milk, beer, soda, etc?



Btw, I'm also thankful to Red Bull. They sponsor some great athletes. In particular dear to my heart, Travis Pastrana and Benny Solis Jr.

Jumkie said:

Why would energy drinks go out of fashion? Are they not like coffee, tea, milk, beer, soda, etc?

Click to expand...

No, they're a lifestyle thing, and lifestyle things go out of fashion very quickly. Especially when those lifestyle choices are aimed at young people. One generation of kids will decide that they want to be different to the next and start drinking something else, and then the party's over.



To me, energy drinks are like tattoos. Right now (and for the past 15 years) tattoos have been what all the cool kids do. But given that now every tramp now has their stamp, within the next 5 years or so, the popularity will decline and we'll move on to something else.



Milk never goes out of style because it never came into style. Coffee in Italy and Holland never went out of style because it has always been an integral part of the culture. Coffee chains in the UK came and went because they were a fashion thing, because the British know absolutely zero about coffee (hence the popularity of Starbucks, which is to coffee as McDonalds is to Michelin stars) and are easily fooled.

Kropotkin said:

I suppose I sound like a ....... long-haired sandal-wearing nursery-school teaching wishy-washy namby-pamby pinko liberal lefty hippy commie socialist, but in fact I am merely pointing out the economic disadvantages of brand loyalty. You are paying a premium for an intangible benefit, and I like my benefits tangible.

Click to expand...

Is that why you like MotoGP? Cause you get to ride the bikes?



My question: Brand allegiance is definitely a financially masochistic behavior, but if it gives someone utility, are they being foolish for chasing happiness? Furthermore, is there a difference between these two scenarios: 1. You try a product, love it, and then fall in love with the brand which identifies the product as something you like 2. You see an advertisement, you want to consume the bogus marketing intangibles so you blow a small fortune caffeinating yourself and adorning yourself in swag only to discover you are still a loser.



Can we even avoid branding? As soon as you categorize yourself as something, people infer certain traits. I ride motorcycles. Like American Chopper?.......ummmm no.

Kropotkin said:

No, they're a lifestyle thing, and lifestyle things go out of fashion very quickly. Especially when those lifestyle choices are aimed at young people. One generation of kids will decide that they want to be different to the next and start drinking something else, and then the party's over.



To me, energy drinks are like tattoos. Right now (and for the past 15 years) tattoos have been what all the cool kids do. But given that now every tramp now has their stamp, within the next 5 years or so, the popularity will decline and we'll move on to something else.



Milk never goes out of style because it never came into style. Coffee in Italy and Holland never went out of style because it has always been an integral part of the culture. Coffee chains in the UK came and went because they were a fashion thing, because the British know absolutely zero about coffee (hence the popularity of Starbucks, which is to coffee as McDonalds is to Michelin stars) and are easily fooled.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm not sure I agree. I suppose we could have said smoking is cool and it will go out of style in the 50s, but they had a nice run, didn't they? Same with energy drinks, yeah, it has an element of "lifestyle" but I don't think they will sit around letting it go out of "fashion". All they'll need to do is rebrand it to the next generation. Maybe they'll put urine in it and tell the youngsters how it represents their new attitudes of pissing on the world. New hit. Never underestimate the stupidity of the consumer.

Jumkie said:

Never underestimate the stupidity of the consumer.

Click to expand...

I think we're seeing a contest between the stupidity of the consumer and their fickleness. Tough fight to call...

Kropotkin said:

Not meant as an attack, and I know just how brilliant Red Bull are at using sporting events to promote their brand. All I wanted to do was to point out that brand loyalty is the most foolish of loyalties. After all, you are paying money for product A, and if product B should turn out to be cheaper/better/more versatile, then you'd be a fool to stick with brand A. The only thing that a brand can give you is a sense of self-worth, and given that it is your own psyche that is deriving that sense of self-worth from a brand, it is you doing all the hard work, not the brand.



I suppose I sound like a ....... long-haired sandal-wearing nursery-school teaching wishy-washy namby-pamby pinko liberal lefty hippy commie socialist, but in fact I am merely pointing out the economic disadvantages of brand loyalty. You are paying a premium for an intangible benefit, and I like my benefits tangible.

Click to expand...

I hear where you're coming from. I just dig what they do, and I'll support them for it. And, as I tweeted earlier, the helmets are pretty.

Jumkie said:

Well, I'm not sure I agree. I suppose we could have said smoking is cool and it will go out of style in the 50s, but they had a nice run, didn't they? Same with energy drinks, yeah, it has an element of "lifestyle" but I don't think they will sit around letting it go out of "fashion". All they'll need to do is rebrand it to the next generation. Maybe they'll put urine in it and tell the youngsters how it represents their new attitudes of pissing on the world. New hit. Never underestimate the stupidity of the consumer.

Click to expand...

Worked for coca cola for a while too. What amazes me is the amount of money they must make. As a drug purveyor sponsoring sport they are among the least objectionable though.

I think the regulation of advertising energy drinks, based on an "unhealthy" caffeine content, is more likely to end sponsorship. They have gone for tobacco, sugar, fast food in a big way over the last decade or so; It's only a matter of time before the health Nazis give us a new prick to kick in caffeine.



They can take my cigarettes & chips (fries) from my cold dead, fat, yellow fingered, hands.

Energy drinks will go out of fashion when the government reguliates them. But for now i enjoy my Monsters, Red bull and tattoos

Goatboy said:

They can take my cigarettes & chips (fries) from my cold dead, fat, yellow fingered, hands.

Click to expand...

So, not long to wait then...

Kropotkin said:

So, not long to wait then...

Click to expand...

No doubt caffeine is a drug, as my afternoon headache if I omit my morning coffee(s) demonstrates, but it is a fairly benign one, especially compared to cigarettes, and I find red bull unexceptionable as a motorsport sponsor; I am getting a free ride anyway since I wouldn't even contemplate partaking of their product. I think them sponsoring the young riders etc is good in particular. I presume it must work for them economically in terms of advertising, but it would seem likely maschewitz (or whatever his name is) is a motorsport enthusiast intrinsically.



One of the problems I have with dorna was them losing michelin, a rusted on supporter of motogp, since sponsors who are a natural fit for the sport like them seem to be in short supply.

michaelm said:

One of the problems I have with dorna was them losing michelin, a rusted on supporter of motogp, since sponsors who are a natural fit for the sport like them seem to be in short supply.

Click to expand...

That's not Dorna. That was the manufacturers. Nobody wanted to use Michelins because - well, because they sucked. They could not make the cultural shift that the tire restrictions (no new tires after Thursday afternoon) imposed. And so nobody wanted to use them, and so Michelin decided to pull out.



I blame Fernando Alonso. Because of him, Santander went to Formula One instead of MotoGP. Santander might have brought a lot of non-bike sponsors into the sport.

Kropotkin said:

I blame Fernando Alonso.

Click to expand...

I think that's something we can all get behind.

Kropotkin said:

No, they're a lifestyle thing, and lifestyle things go out of fashion very quickly. Especially when those lifestyle choices are aimed at young people. One generation of kids will decide that they want to be different to the next and start drinking something else, and then the party's over.



To me, energy drinks are like tattoos. Right now (and for the past 15 years) tattoos have been what all the cool kids do. But given that now every tramp now has their stamp, within the next 5 years or so, the popularity will decline and we'll move on to something else.



Milk never goes out of style because it never came into style. Coffee in Italy and Holland never went out of style because it has always been an integral part of the culture. Coffee chains in the UK came and went because they were a fashion thing, because the British know absolutely zero about coffee (hence the popularity of Starbucks, which is to coffee as McDonalds is to Michelin stars) and are easily fooled.

Click to expand...

Amen. Give me my good old fashioned Kanis & Gunnink. Doe maar gewoon, dan doe al gek genoeg!



By the way, I remember when I was a kid, Red Bull was first introduced. That was more than twenty years ago. They have managed to be around for a freaking long time....

Kropotkin said:

That's not Dorna. That was the manufacturers. Nobody wanted to use Michelins because - well, because they sucked. They could not make the cultural shift that the tire restrictions (no new tires after Thursday afternoon) imposed. And so nobody wanted to use them, and so Michelin decided to pull out.

Click to expand...

You are without any shadow of doubt better informed than I am, but I thought michelin wanted to keep going and ducati at least were prepared to switch to them if there was no control tyre, and that honda if not their riders were ambivalent. I think michelin were in financial trouble generally at the time, and it was said that one reason the sns tyres went was because they could no longer afford to produce them. I think given time and the end of the global financial crisis they could have got back up; they continued to make better qualifying tyres the whole time. I for one was sorry to see them go after their long involvement, after basically only 1 or 2 bad seasons, in the first of which it was only one bridgestone rider who was mainly beating them.

michaelm said:

You are without any shadow of doubt better informed than I am, but I thought michelin wanted to keep going and ducati at least were prepared to switch to them if there was no control tyre, and that honda if not their riders were ambivalent. I think michelin were in financial trouble generally at the time, and it was said that one reason the sns tyres went was because they could no longer afford to produce them. I think given time and the end of the global financial crisis they could have got back up; they continued to make better qualifying tyres the whole time. I for one was sorry to see them go after their long involvement, after basically only 1 or 2 bad seasons, in the first of which it was only one bridgestone rider who was mainly beating them.

Click to expand...

I also remember the rumor of Michelin sticking around with Ducati. But the SNS were gone in 2008 because of the tire allocation regulations, not because of cost. Cost was a factor in the rule, and you may be right that Michelin couldn't afford to do it anymore, but the rules outlawed them anyway.