planetf1.com

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14139 ... estigation

The logo for Mission Winnow is clearly meant to look like the Marlboro chevron but as it's Ferrari I expect that they will get away with it.

Ferrari fan here. Hope Marlboro goes down.

Mission Winnow sounds like it has the most vague and diffuse goals I've ever heard.

BMWSauber84 wrote:Mission Winnow sounds like it has the most vague and diffuse goals I've ever heard.

That's because its actual goal is to advertise Marlboro.

Doesn't make me think of Marlboro at all - i think it's a bit of a stretch, so as i'm concerned nothing to see here.

PT03 wrote:Doesn't make me think of Marlboro at all - i think it's a bit of a stretch, so as i'm concerned nothing to see here.

I agree, a little arrow pointing to something vaguely looking like the Marlboro arrow is really not making me think of cigarettes. If you just looked at the car, without knowing anything about the sponsors, your mind would not really go to Marlboro, in my opinion of course.

BAT has the word "Tobacco" in their name and that is... fine though???

Siao7 wrote:

PT03 wrote:Doesn't make me think of Marlboro at all - i think it's a bit of a stretch, so as i'm concerned nothing to see here.

I agree, a little arrow pointing to something vaguely looking like the Marlboro arrow is really not making me think of cigarettes. If you just looked at the car, without knowing anything about the sponsors, your mind would not really go to Marlboro, in my opinion of course.

BAT has the word "Tobacco" in their name and that is... fine though???

Same here.

This symbol to me is much more easily identifiable with Marlboro that the MW arrow



I've no drama with the Mission Winnow symbol, but then again i'm not entirely convinced a legally available product from a tax paying organisation should be banned from advertising their product in a free society.

Jezza13 wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

PT03 wrote:Doesn't make me think of Marlboro at all - i think it's a bit of a stretch, so as i'm concerned nothing to see here.

I agree, a little arrow pointing to something vaguely looking like the Marlboro arrow is really not making me think of cigarettes. If you just looked at the car, without knowing anything about the sponsors, your mind would not really go to Marlboro, in my opinion of course.

BAT has the word "Tobacco" in their name and that is... fine though???

Same here.

This symbol to me is much more easily identifiable with Marlboro that the MW arrow



I've no drama with the Mission Winnow symbol, but then again i'm not entirely convinced a legally available product from a tax paying organisation should be banned from advertising their product in a free society.

i'm all aboard with beer companies getting the ok again to advertise on race cars. they still sell beer at tracks, people still bring it in coolers....

i'm not keen on tobacco companies adding addictive substances, but i agree, its a legal product....let em advertise

where does it end ? if i agree with all this banning unhealthy stuff, shouldn't they ban mcdonalds from advertising here in the states ?

pc27b wrote:

Jezza13 wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

PT03 wrote:Doesn't make me think of Marlboro at all - i think it's a bit of a stretch, so as i'm concerned nothing to see here.

I agree, a little arrow pointing to something vaguely looking like the Marlboro arrow is really not making me think of cigarettes. If you just looked at the car, without knowing anything about the sponsors, your mind would not really go to Marlboro, in my opinion of course.

BAT has the word "Tobacco" in their name and that is... fine though???

Same here.

This symbol to me is much more easily identifiable with Marlboro that the MW arrow



I've no drama with the Mission Winnow symbol, but then again i'm not entirely convinced a legally available product from a tax paying organisation should be banned from advertising their product in a free society.

i'm all aboard with beer companies getting the ok again to advertise on race cars. they still sell beer at tracks, people still bring it in coolers....

i'm not keen on tobacco companies adding addictive substances, but i agree, its a legal product....let em advertise

where does it end ? if i agree with all this banning unhealthy stuff, shouldn't they ban mcdonalds from advertising here in the states ?

Alcohol is an addictive substance... It may not be as addictive as tobacco is but alcohol addiction will certainly bring you to a quicker death and will, in most cases, not allow you to function like a normal human being.

At the end of the day as you have stated, if it is a legal product you shouls be able to advertise it. I find it ridiculous that tobacco companies can't sponsor anymore. You're either going to smoke or you're not going to smoke. Ferrari sporting a Marlboro logo isn't going to change that.

i loved all the marlboro liveries as a kid, never made me smoke one, or any other brand. neither did the beer advertising make me drink a beer

caffeine is addictive, and i crave my 3 cups in the morning. i wonder if a south american coffee bean company wanted to sponsor....could they ?!

pc27b wrote:i loved all the marlboro liveries as a kid, never made me smoke one, or any other brand. neither did the beer advertising make me drink a beer

caffeine is addictive, and i crave my 3 cups in the morning. i wonder if a south american coffee bean company wanted to sponsor....could they ?!

Although it tastes vile... You can get your caffeine fix from a can of Red Bull, plenty of advertising on track for that!

Jezza13 wrote:but then again i'm not entirely convinced a legally available product from a tax paying organisation should be banned from advertising their product in a free society.

I'm entirely in agreement with you on this. If tobacco products are legal, what right does the government have to say you can't help your business by advertising them? And if it is illegal to advertise them on the grounds of harmful effects, why are they legal at all?

Personally, I'd like to see traditional cigarettes made illegal. But since they're not, I don't find any compelling argument for why the governing bodies should be able to ban their advertising.

PT03 wrote:Doesn't make me think of Marlboro at all - i think it's a bit of a stretch, so as i'm concerned nothing to see here.

Malbero have been coming up with tricky little ways to keep advertising for years and this is clearly more of the same.

pc27b wrote:i loved all the marlboro liveries as a kid, never made me smoke one, or any other brand. neither did the beer advertising make me drink a beer

caffeine is addictive, and i crave my 3 cups in the morning. i wonder if a south american coffee bean company wanted to sponsor....could they ?!

That may be true in your case, but not for many others. These enormous companies would not be throwing vast sums at advertising if it didn't work.

I personally couldn't care less if people smoke in private. If they want to smell like that and have that horrible dried out looking skin on their faces by the time they are 40 then it's up to them I suppose.

But pretty much every scientist (that isn't funded by tobacco companies) recognises the link between smoking and cancer. Romanticism of cigarettes is not something that is needed.

I think this is all for nothing. if this works out it can be a great revenue stream for many teams and promote an alternative to cigarettes that I think is valuable to everyone.

FAQ: "What is Mission Winnow?"
https://www.missionwinnow.com/frequentl ... tions.html
...
Nope, still none the wiser.

wolfticket wrote:FAQ: "What is Mission Winnow?"
https://www.missionwinnow.com/frequentl ... tions.html
...
Nope, still none the wiser.

Well it obvious isn't it? They want to articulate their initiative to to demonstrate their commitment to continuous innovation and development of new solutions that can expedite positive change for society, in a way that's fully transparent.

people get paid to write this $*#¥.

wolfticket wrote:FAQ: "What is Mission Winnow?"
https://www.missionwinnow.com/frequentl ... tions.html
...
Nope, still none the wiser.

I don't think I've ever come across an organisational bio that says so much yet explains so little.

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

wolfticket wrote:FAQ: "What is Mission Winnow?"
https://www.missionwinnow.com/frequentl ... tions.html
...
Nope, still none the wiser.

Well it obvious isn't it? They want to articulate their initiative to to demonstrate their commitment to continuous innovation and development of new solutions that can expedite positive change for society, in a way that's fully transparent.

people get paid to write this $*#¥.

Yeah, I know someone who works in that field. He is the one who makes up some of these slogans. For small local stuff, no company of this size, but still. The amount of bull he has to come up with is fantastic... Someone is indeed paid to write these sh*t!!!!