The Mercedes Formula 1 team has announced that it has parted ways with sponsor Kingspan.
The deal between the pair, which was announced last week, came under fire on social media after a group representing the surviving families of the 2017 Grenfell Tower tragedy called for Mercedes to sever ties with the company.
Kingspan has faced criticism at the Grenfell Tower Inquiry in relation to failing critical safety tests, including testing carried out on an older version of the product that caught fire more slowly and emitted less heat.
Mercedes defended its sponsorship deal last week, with team boss Toto Wolff offering to meet those negatively impacted by the announcement.
However, the German manufacturer has mutually agreed to part ways from Kingspan.
“The Mercedes-AMG Petronas F1 Team and Kingspan today announced that they have mutually agreed to end their partnership,” read a statement.
“Announced last week, the new partnership included Kingspan chairing a new Sustainability Working Group for the team, and aimed to deliver carbon reductions through their leading-edge environmentally sustainable solutions for the team’s future campus.
“However, both parties have subsequently concluded that it is not appropriate for the partnership to move forward at the current point in time, notwithstanding its intended positive impact, and we have therefore agreed that it will be discontinued with immediate effect.”
Kingspan also released its own statement, in which it said: “We are deeply aware of the sensitivities raised in recent days, and so we have jointly agreed that it’s not appropriate to move forward at the current point in time.
“Much has been written about this over the past few days, and out of consideration for our customers and all the great people who work for us, we believe we must respond.
“We had no role in the Grenfell Tower refurbishment. However, our Kingspan Insulation UK business is a core participant in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and fully supports the Inquiry’s important work.”
It added that its “product made up approximately 5% of the insulation layer of the façade system” and that it “was substituted without our knowledge”.
Kingspan also asserts that it has “completed new tests which support the previous fire safety claims of the three historical K15 large-scale system tests which came into question during the Inquiry process”.
Did Kingspan do wrong?
Or, to put it another way, why do some regard Hugo Boss as “good” and some (others?) Kingspan as “bad”?
The world would be a much easier place without twatter, backchat and all other forms of social media.
What is this if it is not “social media”?
The OP didn’t exclude this forum from the comment, so what’s your point?
My point is that any sort of posting and/or comment on the internet amounts to “social media”. What’s yours?
That your implication the OP’s comment was contradictory was inaccurate.
Their lab testing is structured to mirror anomaly detection techniques used in deep-space signal monitoring.