/https%3A%2F%2Fcdn-tor.buminteractif.com%2Ffanf1%2F2026%2F02%2FGettyImages-2262673077-scaled.jpg)
Media visibility is probably the main reason why a sponsor decides to put its name on an F1 car. After all, as the old saying goes, the more you are seen, the more you are known. However, other factors cannot be ignored, as any prime location comes at a high cost.
When a brand decides to put its logo on a race car, the price can be exorbitant, but the return on investment is surprisingly calculable. Take the partnership between Mercedes and Petronas, for example: the Malaysian oil giant pays around €30 million for a premium package that covers the radiator pontoon, front and rear wings, the space in front of the driver's cockpit, and even a place in the team's official name.
A few years earlier, the alliance between Red Bull and Infiniti (Nissan's luxury brand) had pushed the bill to nearly €40 million for the right to place its brand on the radiator pontoon, rear wing, side wing panels, nose logo, and a place in the team name.
In contrast, Martini, Williams' long-standing main sponsor, pays around €15 million for a full livery contract that includes the engine cover, rear wing, front of the cockpit, and naming rights. All three agreements also extend to team clothing, pit lane signage, transport trucks, and many other elements, demonstrating how each team tailors its commercial policy to the status of the sponsor and the technical support it provides. Petronas, for example, provides fuel, oil, and lubricants in kind, which affects the amount of its fees. The raw figures presented in the attached infographic only reflect part of the reality. The cost of a sponsor varies depending on the popularity of the team, its media footprint (television, digital, print, and social media), and the appeal of the drivers, meaning that the average price can vary by a factor of three. What matters most to brands is the value of the visibility they receive. In 2007, Vodafone topped the rankings in terms of exposure with 3 hours and 58 minutes on screen, or 11.6% of total airtime, which translated into an advertising value of €135.44 million for an expenditure of €57.19 million, representing a return on investment of 136.8%. Marlboro followed closely behind with 3 hours and 45 minutes (10.98%). Red Bull, despite having its own team, only ranked ninth with 1 hour and 4 minutes (3.16%).
In 2010, Red Bull became the most visible brand, with 4 hours and 27 minutes of airtime during the first fifteen Grand Prix races, representing a value of €107.8 million for an investment of nearly €100 million, which is still a lower return on investment than Vodafone's in 2007.
At the 2011 Australian Grand Prix, Formula Money data showed that Red Bull was once again in the lead with a 24% exposure share (valued at €10 million), ahead of Vodafone (10.14%) and circuit sponsor Qantas (8.94%). Ferrari ranked fourth (5.99%), Renault ninth (2.71%) and Mercedes fifteenth (1.46%). The trend is clear: the more visible a brand is, the more money it makes.
On the other side of the Atlantic, the dynamic is similar, but on a larger scale. The 2008 NASCAR season, with 38 races and more than 244 million viewers, generated 248 hours and 10 minutes of brand exposure, with a total value of €1.34 billion. Dale Earnhardt Jr. alone accounted for 44 hours and 40 minutes (≈17% of the total), worth more than €393 million, despite finishing twelfth in the Chase.
In the now defunct Champ Car series, 2006 generated €91 million in exposure in 116 hours, led by Bridgestone (€22 million) and Ford (€19.3 million).
These figures highlight why sponsorship remains a powerful marketing tool: it offers measurable media coverage that can be negotiated for optimal placement. Whether it's a newcomer, a historic team, a star driver, or a national icon, success depends on strategic positioning, narrative hooks, patriotic appeal, and, if necessary, the buzz generated by controversy—because in motorsports, any attention, good or bad, translates into value.
