Cadillac Unveil Team F1 Logo Ahead Of Entry In 2026 Season
Last Updated:
Cadillac reveals their Formula 1 team logo and brand ahead of their 2026 entry, with Graeme Lowdon as Team Principal and Ferrari engines until 2029.
Ahead of their highly-anticipated entry as the grid's 11th team from the 2026 season onwards, Cadillac have revealed their team logo and brand that will mark their Formula 1 identity and set them apart from their rivals for the upcoming seasons.
Leaning into their all-American reputation, the team – who are backed by TWG Motorsports and General Motors (GM) – held a red carpet event in Miami following Saturday's Sprint and Qualifying to unveil their chosen branding.
With the 2025 season almost a quarter complete, there is plenty of focus on Cadillac and the steps they take ahead of next year's first Grand Prix.
Cadillac have taken on the experienced Graeme Lowdon, who was previously a key part of Manor's journey to F1, as Team Principal and will compete with Ferrari engines until 2029, with GM Performance Power Units LLC. having been officially approved as an F1 power unit supplier by the FIA from then.
Ahead of the launch event, Lowdon had explained the situation regarding their vacant driver positions and claimed although having an American driver would be good for the American side, they will make the decision on merit.
'We've got a fairly good idea, and we've narrowed it down quite a bit.We were effectively kept out of the last round of driver discussions because we didn't have an entry, and were in a slightly unusual position but it also means there is a lot less competitive tension, and we can take a little bit of time.
'Obviously, the number one priority for us is to have something for the driver to drive, and that is where a lot of the management bandwidth is. When it comes to an American driver, everyone would love to see an American driver in an American team with an American engine, but this is also a world championship.
'We have to select everybody on merit, and as we have said before, there is nothing stopping a boy or girl with an American passport from driving for an American Formula 1 team. We'll select them on merit, and if the driver happens to be an American, that is something the fans would really like.
'But we've got to respect the world championship, and if we want to be competitive as we can, we must choose everyone in the team on merit," said Lowdon to Sky Sports F1.
(This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - IANS)
First Published:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
27 minutes ago
- First Post
The Deng doctrine: How China weaponises rare earths to gain leverage in trade war with the US
China has signalled for more than 15 years that it was looking to weaponise areas of the global supply chain, a strategy modelled on longstanding American export controls Beijing views as aimed at stalling its rise. read more China has long indicated its intention to weaponise parts of the global supply chain—a strategy now visibly playing out through tighter control of rare earth exports. Modelled on longstanding US export restrictions that Beijing believes are designed to limit its technological rise, China is now turning similar tools to its own advantage. The recent rush by companies to secure export licences for rare earth materials, culminating in a phone call between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday, highlights how Beijing has refined a powerful lever in the ongoing trade war. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Industry experts say China may approve more shipments in the near term but it has no plans to dismantle the new system underpinning those approvals. Instead, China's new export licensing regime, closely mirroring the US model grants the government deeper visibility into global supply chokepoints including critical sectors such as electric vehicle motors and precision systems used in missiles. This level of control offers Beijing a potent means to retaliate in the trade dispute while asserting dominance in strategically vital markets. China sharpens rare earth export controls in trade war playbook As relations between the two countries sour and supply chains fracture, both Washington and Beijing appear determined to shift from broad tariffs to more focused, technical barriers—ones that could have lasting implications for industries worldwide. 'China originally took inspiration for these export control methods from the comprehensive U.S. sanctions regime,' Zhu Junwei, a scholar at the Grandview Institution, a Beijing-based think tank focused on international relations told Reuters. 'China has been trying to build its own export control systems since then, to be used as a last resort.' After a phone call with Chinese President Xi Jinping, President Trump said the two leaders were 'straightening out some of the points,' particularly regarding rare earth magnets—key components in electric vehicle (EV) motors and high-tech weaponry. But Trump did not confirm whether Beijing had agreed to speed up export licensing, a sticking point since Washington imposed restrictions on chip design software and jet engines over what it calls China's deliberate slow-walking of approvals. China, which holds a near-monopoly on rare earth magnets, added some of the most advanced types to its export control list in April. The move forces all exporters to seek government licences before shipping these materials, turning a once-obscure division of the commerce ministry—staffed by around 60 people—into a powerful gatekeeper of global manufacturing. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The export curbs, part of a broader retaliation package against US tariffs, have had ripple effects well beyond the US. Several European auto parts manufacturers were forced to shut down production lines this week after exhausting their supply of rare earth magnets, underscoring the global reach of Beijing's measures. Though China's commerce ministry has not publicly commented on the issue, analysts say the blanket controls offer Beijing both leverage in its trade war with Washington and a strategic tool to reshape global supply chains in its favour. 'Beijing has a degree of plausible deniability – no one can prove China is doing this on purpose,' Noah Barkin, senior adviser at Rhodium Group, a China-focused U.S. thinktank told Reuters. 'But the rate of approvals is a pretty clear signal that China is sending a message, exerting pressure to prevent trade negotiations with the U.S. leading to additional technology control.' China mines about 70% of the world's rare earths but maintains a near-monopoly on refining and processing, giving it a powerful position in global manufacturing. Even if export approvals accelerate, as U.S. President Donald Trump indicated after a call with President Xi Jinping, Beijing's new licensing system offers it unprecedented visibility into how companies use these critical materials. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD European and U.S. executives warn that by forcing exporters to apply for licences, China's government can now closely monitor supplier chokepoints in sectors ranging from electric vehicles to advanced weaponry, oversight that other governments lack due to the complexity of global supply chains. Hundreds of Japanese companies are expected to need Chinese export approvals for rare earth magnets in the coming weeks, a person lobbying on their behalf told Reuters. Without timely licences, they risk production disruptions, underscoring how Beijing's new trade tools could reshape access to materials essential to modern industry. 'It's sharpening China's scalpel,' said a US-based executive at a company seeking to piece together an alternative supply chain who sought anonymity. 'It's not a way to oversee the export of magnets, but a way to gain influence and advantage over America.' China's export controls deepen as fears grow over weaponisation of supply chain power Fears that China could weaponise its dominance in critical supply chains first emerged in 2010, when it briefly halted rare earth exports to Japan during a territorial dispute. But those concerns have intensified in recent years as Beijing sharpens its trade tools and broadens export restrictions across strategic sectors. As far back as 1992, former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping noted, 'The Middle East has oil, China has rare earths.' That sentiment has shaped policy: in 2020, China passed a sweeping Export Control Law allowing it to restrict exports of any items deemed vital to national security, including materials, technology and data. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Since then, China has built up its own sanctions arsenal in response to U.S. restrictions, investing heavily in alternative supply chains while tightening its grip on key exports. In 2022, the United States imposed broad curbs on chip and semiconductor tool exports to China, aiming to slow the country's military and AI advancements. But analysts say Beijing has continued to make headway despite those barriers. In retaliation, China has steadily expanded its export controls. Last year it imposed licensing requirements for gallium, germanium, and certain graphite products—vital inputs for defence, electronics, and green technologies. Shipments of these minerals to the U.S. were banned outright in December. Then in February, China added five more metals to its control list. Now, following a phone call between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping, attention has turned to whether China will ease its latest rare earth export curbs. But analysts warn of a lack of transparency. 'It's virtually impossible to know what percentage of requests for non-military end users get approved because the data is not public and companies don't want to publicly confirm either way,' said Cory Combs, an analyst at China-focused consultancy Trivium. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The opaqueness of Beijing's process and its expanding powers over chokepoint materials are reinforcing Western concerns that supply chains are becoming geopolitical battlegrounds. With inputs from agencies
Scroll.in
44 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Slighted by Trump, India must rejig foreign policy paradigm
Indians were shocked by US President Donald Trump asking American CEOs and industrialists to not base their manufacturing facilities in India. Trump reportedly told Apple CEO Tim Cook that he does not want him to manufacture iPhones in India. He threatened Apple with 25% tariffs if they did so. This is not the first time that Trump directed major industry leaders not to manufacture in India. Earlier, in February, he had told Elon Musk not to set up a Tesla factory in India as that would be 'unfair' to the US. This directive came just after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi met the US President and the Tesla CEO on February 13 with the hope that Tesla would build in India. These provocative actions have sorely disappointed Indians who were expecting to be beneficiaries of Trump's benevolence as US companies moved out of China. In addition, Indians were shocked at the way illegal migrants from the country were degraded, criminalised and transported back to India in fetters on a military aircraft. And now, Indian students are not getting visas or their visas are being cancelled disrupting their studies at US universities. Indians recovering from shock Trump's comeback electoral win of November 2024 was welcomed in India as he was seen by the establishment virtually as 'Our man in Washington'. This perception was bolstered by the hyped chemistry between him and Modi. However, public opinion has started shifting in the opposite direction. Trump's core foreign policy objectives rest on trade, tariffs, transactions and targets. He chose to target India as a ' very high tariff nation ' in his very first address to the joint session of the US Congress on March 7 when he implied that India imposed the most unfair tariffs on the US. Trump called India a 'tariff king' and a 'big abuser'. The US trade deficit of US$100 billion with India irked Trump. Now, he is pushing for an almost zero tariff on US goods, especially cars – now that Tesla is ready to enter the Indian market. However, Trump wants the opening of markets for free and easy entry of US goods – irrespective of whether they are in demand in India or not; for example, he seeks to replace Scotch with American bourbon whiskey. The US is targeting both China and India. Others in the Global South are likely to be targeted next. Trump's 'Make America Great Again' policy seems to be about cutting the bottom out of any potential manufacturing adversary. Trump equates India and Pakistan As if the economic hit was not hard enough, the Trump team has gone after India's strategic interests in the light of the ghastly terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, on April 22, which India believes was Pakistan-sponsored, and the Indian retribution that followed. Trump called the terror attack a 'bad one', without naming Pakistan, but turned it into an even-handed India-Pakistan conflict, stating incorrectly that the two had been ' fighting for 1,500 years '. As usual, Trump put the focus on himself as he said he was 'close to both countries', and the two would ' figure it out one way or another ', distancing himself from any special relation with India that Indian strategic analysts used to boast about. As India carried out military strikes against Pakistan, named Operation Sindoor, the US Presidential team reiterated 'good relations with both' countries and Trump said that if he could 'help I will be there'. In the two days of the military operations that followed, the US Secretary of State repeatedly said that they were speaking to both sides, which subsequently agreed to an immediate ceasefire and start talks. He claimed that the ' US stopped nuclear conflict '. Trump further said he would 'soon' give trade access to India-Pakistan, a claim that the US Commerce Secretary put on record. India took pains to claim that while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio did speak to Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, the military operation was halted after the Pakistani Director General of Military Operations asked for a halt; ie, the ceasefire was reached bilaterally. India upset with US Why did India feel slighted by the alleged US role? The US hyphenated India-Pakistan, something that India does not like. It has sought to de-hyphenate itself with Pakistan by improving relations with the US for years. India perhaps also saw the US infantilising both countries with its rhetoric that only a politically mature US could stop the two squabbling neighbours. US claims also demonstrated its ability to intervene in South Asian affairs and underlined that the US remains a hegemon in this region. India also saw in the US statements a challenge to its strategic autonomy. It was seen by India as siding with Pakistan's nuclear blackmail and threat, as it helped demonstrate that the US had saved the world from a possible nuclear escalation. Lastly and most importantly, by pointing to Kashmir as the root cause of the war, the US was seen as internationalising an issue that India sees as an internal issue. It is quite possible that now, US think tanks will do their bit to showcase the US role and heighten this agenda. What India needs to do What can India conclude about the US behaviour? First, that the US has no permanent friends or enemies – only permanent interests. Second, that the US has a hub and spokes policy towards all – the US is the central hub and all other countries are spokes of different sizes that the US can manipulate and manage. Third, that the US military-industrial technology complex will seek to derive the greatest benefits from both countries and across the region. India will, therefore, have to rejig both its thinking and paradigm in foreign policy at the global, regional and bilateral levels as also in its domestic debates. India must also be wary of US interests drowning Indian interests – the US has always been a predatory power and embeds itself in regional conflicts and gains from these. India has been committed to multi-polarity, BRICS and other such forums and should stick with and enhance this. India must continue with self-reliance and its traditional time-tested partners. It also needs to curb the domestic war rhetoric as that does not help the interest of peace or show India as a sane voice of the Global South.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Formula 1 sponsorship revenue over $2B in 2024, closing on NFL
HighlightsFormula 1 achieved $2.04 billion in sponsorship revenue in 2024, making it the second highest behind the National Football League, which garnered $2.5 billion. The most significant individual sponsorship agreement for Formula 1 is the 10-year, $1 billion deal with luxury conglomerate LVMH, which includes brands such as TAG Heuer, Louis Vuitton, and Hennessy. Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull, and McLaren are the leading teams in terms of sponsorship earnings, with car and driver technology contributing nearly $500 million in partner income for all Formula 1 teams. Formula 1 is hot on the tail of the big dog of professional sports marketing , the NFL , and cleared $2.04 billion in sponsorship revenue in 2024. SponsorUnited, which tracks sponsorship and advertising takes across sports, had F1 and its teams behind only the NFL at $2.5 billion in total sponsorship revenue. The total advertising spend for F1 in 2025 is on course to exceed $2.5 billion, according to Ampere Analysis. But major U.S. sponsors such as American Express and IBM still are flowing in with the circuit catapulting in popularity off the success of Netflix series "Drive to Survive" while thriving under the control of Liberty Media. F1 tops the NBA, MLB and NHL and its racing teams each accounted for more than $6 million, according to the report, which breaks down the airbox and sidepod ad placement cost at more than $5 million for the most popular drivers on the circuit. Tops among individual sponsor agreements with F1 is the 10-year, $1 billion pact with luxury conglomerate LVMH, which holds a portfolio anchored by TAG Heuer, Louis Vuitton and Hennessy. The largest sponsor for any F1 team is the Williams contract with Australian software corporation Atlassian valued at a reported $25 million to $30 million per year. On the NFL side, the most significant singular sponsorship commitment is with Pepsi. That contract is worth a reported $2 billion over 10 years for exclusive rights at all NFL events and use of the league's trademark in advertising. With F1, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren are the highest earners in the sponsorship category. Car and driver technology accounts for nearly $500 million in partner income for the 10 teams, according to the report.
