2498 replies to this topic

[tifosiMac]

Don't agree. There is nothing to me that suggests he doesn't understand the sport. He knows more about F1 than Suzi by a mile. I have cringed far too many times at the silly errors Suzi has made to like her. She doesn't think on the spot at all, she has a researcher who writes down the questions on her iPad which she just reads from.
 
Formula One and MotoGP are two very different things. She grew up with MotoGP and that enthusiasm from a young age showed in her presenting of it. F1, however, she is clearly a rookie and hasn't improved much at all.
 
Why the BBC thought they would choose Suzi over Lee is beyond me, it was a huge mistake and a step in the wrong direction for their coverage. I was anti-Sky until she turned up on my screen and had a disastrous first year. And I used to be a huge fan of her on the gadget show.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Suzi then. I enjoy the coverage and think she adds to it along with EJ who I think is well worth the spot with his comical comments and paddock inside access. If we find personalities we don't like on each channel I think that is fair enough. I like more of the BBC cast than than on Sky personally but only watch it as a last resort if I can't be bothered to wait for highlights. I am likely to be giving less time to F1 in the coming years anyway as its failing to excite me like it once did. Neither set of presenters can help that however.

[Lotus53B]

I look at it the other way round - if F1 (or any other sport) drops FTA coverage, I drop my viewing.

It has already happened with a few sports for me, F1 will likely be one more.

When I first started watching F1 in the 70s, live races on television were very rare. 

 

What goes around, comes around.

[jonpollak]

No public foundation, but JP said it and I'm inclined to believe him.

Just briefly....

My soon to be Daughter in-law works for the Government in the sport/ culture/ whateverbullshit dept.

She told me last week... F1 on FTA is toast.
Jp

Edited by jonpollak, 24 July 2015 - 03:31.

[STRFerrari4Ever]

Just briefly....

My soon to be Daughter in-law works for the Government in the sport/ culture/ whateverbullshit dept.

She told me last week... F1 on FTA is toast.
Jp

French toast?
Marmite on toast?
Peanut butter on toast?
Jam on toast?

Come on mate these are all key questions that need answers. But in all seriousness the BBC's focus is shifting and who can really blame them.

I can see Sky sticking with F1 for a while because at the moment BT are just growing more and more.

BT completely taking the rights for Champions League football which was one of Sky Sports main draws is a pretty big blow, so I'd imagine they'd want to keep a marquee sport like F1, especially with all the proposed changes and potentially better racing and maybe better views.

[johnwilliamdavies]

BBC website working well this morning... I've got to listen to Crofty.

[SophieB]

BBC website working well this morning... I've got to listen to Crofty.

 

BBCF1 ‏@bbcf1  43 secs44 seconds ago

We're back folks... Watch live #FP1 practice now on @BBCiPlayer & @BBCSport website: http://bbc.in/1DAVtWv  #bbcf1

[SpeedRacer`]

Just briefly....

My soon to be Daughter in-law works for the Government in the sport/ culture/ whateverbullshit dept.

She told me last week... F1 on FTA is toast.
Jp

 

Hmmm, I'm not sure why the government would get involved in that - after all F1 isn't a "protected event" like the olympics and Wimbledon for example.

 

Not doubting you for a moment but I'd be surprised if the BBC are talking to the government about rights details for Sports when they're supposed to be independant!

 

Also maybe Bernie will push for ITV/C4 to step up before he agrees to it (after all, he is well within his rights to force the BBC to pay up until 2018 regardless). Remember both ITV/C4 were available to have full FTA coverage for 2013 but couldn't start as early as 2012, that's why Bernie accepted the BBC/Sky offer.

[ThisIsMischaW]

If Bernie wants FTA coverage I'm sure he could make a deal with ITV. But does he want to...

[AlexanderF1]

If Bernie wants FTA coverage I'm sure he could make a deal with ITV. But does he want to...

Motorsports need fta. Look at moto gp going to bt. bbc and eurosport had a 1.1million viewers average and 2 million in the 2013 last race, now bt only average 250k viewers of live coverage.  i can't believe we might have to go back to 2nd rate fta ad break coverage. We should be moving forwards not backwards. If we lose all fta f1 then f1 will fall flat on its face in the uk.

Edited by AlexanderF1, 24 July 2015 - 10:47.

[superden]

As above though, as long as Sky/BT et al make enough to cover the bills and keep a reasonable profit margin, they are happy. To accomplish that, they need a relatively low audience turnout, due to the ridiculous subscriptions they charge.

I'll keep my money and attend a few live events a year, like the BTCC. I grew up with what could best be described, until the 90's at any rate, sketchy coverage. So whilst it's a backward step, it's not exactly new territory.

I won't pay to watch F1, no matter how much I like it. That said, there will continue to be a sufficient number of Sky sheep to ensure that paywall coverage remains lucrative enough to continue. For those of us who opt not to be wallet raped, it will be highlights packages of varying quality.

Edited by superden, 24 July 2015 - 11:02.

[TheMonkeyDaft]

Just briefly....

My soon to be Daughter in-law works for the Government in the sport/ culture/ whateverbullshit dept.

She told me last week... F1 on FTA is toast.
Jp

And with that you are very likely to see more of Sky filling their pre-race/post-race with advert's

[Buttoneer]

I will be very surprised in subscriber numbers changed that much based on this news. If you're a F1 nut who needs to see it live, you'll already be paying.

[ThisIsMischaW]

On it's own it won't make much difference, but Sky have put together a very strong portfolio of sports products outside of football. That's what will help with subscribers.

[chunder27]

It is interesting how sport is developing into pretty much a minority tv viewer experience these days.

 

I was watching some stuff about the 2005 Ashes last night, and Vaughan and Flintoff kept talking about the fact that EVERYONE could watch it and this was part of the reason why it gripped the nation, you COULD come home from work and watch those last few hours of gripping test cricket because it was on the telly. I know because I did it, and so did a few of my friends who only had a passing interest in cricket but are now avid fans like me.

 

Then the EWCB sold their soul to SKY, like just about every sport in the world has now to the highest bidder. Cricket is now behind a paywall, all test matches are. They are happy with tens of thousands less viewers but more money to spend where they want. Quite how that workls I dont know, ask their accountant.

 

Now, sports like cricket, rugby have a problem because they are team and participant based, but motorsport is not, it is based around one thing, and one thing alone, money. NOTHING ELSE.  So fta tv people have no interest in legacy like they might with football or cricket or rugby, it isn't even in the equation with F1. So they have no emotional reason to bid for it, all they can base their decision on is money.

 

MotoGP was never about viewing figures, it was always about bidding more. BBC made a desultory bid and BT bid chuff all for what they got, plus it fills hours and hours of network time, but it still must cost them a lot to put it on, fly the guys to races, they send a camera team and three or four punters.  Studio show etc. But for most people you have to pay for BT Sport now after the year deal, so the vewing figures will have dropped for older customers. I have two friends that dropped away, and they were rugger fans too, so had two reason to watch, but didn't.

 

If you are only serving the minority NOBODY wins. Other than the governing body and a few execs at the broadcaster. The sport loses fans, sponsors run away and youa re bringing up a generation of kids for whom sport is not free to watch, that above all else is a disastrous legacy.

 

Live audiences will survive, look at the berks that happily pay hundreds of pounds to watch F1 at the dullest place in the world every year, and even worse watch bikes there too for ever increasing entry prices! 

 

You can only blame them, I am afraid. Nothing will change until people stop subscibing. It might take years, but for the long term success of a lot of sports it has to happen.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I was aware of racing pre-F1 and used to watch the Indy 500 religiously. I got up early Sunday morning in 1995 and turned on the TV and the Monaco GP was still running on ESPN. Because of the red flag and the restart I caught the last 10-15 minutes. I'd literally never seen anything like it before. Where is Monaco. Who is Michael Schumacher. What the hell is a Renault.

 

Granted ESPN is a pay channel but it was part of basic cable. By 1998 F1 was on Speedvision which I didn't have. If it had been on Speedvision a few years earlier I don't know how long it would have taken to stumble upon it. And by that time I'd have probably made different career decisions. I'd arguably have been in college by then rather than thinking "hey racing looks pretty cool." So even if I had seen F1 sometime in the 2000s, would it have caught me in the same way?

[Buttoneer]

Cricket has been suffering from a lack of grass-roots participation too. Maybe a side effect of the paywall. Not sure motorsports will suffer the same way since it's only well funded children who can afford to pursue that particular sporting hobby.

[Ross Stonefeld]

But what about the customer base? There are peope who watch racing because I watch it(and get a kick out of watching me with it because I say "Keep an eye on X" and 10 minutes later the commentator goes "I wonder what X is doing there..." ) and I can take them to an Indycar race and get good seats for less than a hundred bucks. And they can at least see what it's like.

 

I would barely recommend F1 tickets at the current prices to people who are interested followers.

 

Totally recommend attending MotoGP though.

 

And Monster Trucks. That was indoors and $25. It was amazing.

[chunder27]

That was kind of my poorly made point Buttoneer, I know quite a few people who have taken up cricket, and most importantly for a UK sport it does attract ethnic minorities, in fact in some areas like where I live in Luton they drive the sport forward and domnate local cricket!

 

Motorsport is for rich kids primarily so why would any (especially) free to air company think they might be promoting participation?  After every single BBC short there is the be inspired logo running, how can you be inspired by a Lewis when you live somehwere where there are no kart tracks? 

 

I went to MotoGP many years ago and loved it, you had access to the riders, tickets werr relatively cheap. Themn Rossi happened, promoters and tracks suddenly ramped pu prices as demand soared so now it is a very expensive race day out and tv coverage in the UK is bahind a very restricted pay wall. Who wins? Dorna, BT and Silverstone, noone else/ Have you tried watching bikes at Silverstone, its like being 1000ft up in the air watching a mini moto race, abysmal venue for bikes sorry.

 

Monster trucks I can relate to, same as supercross, the drivers and riders are accessible, you can see what is going on, the atmosphere is pumped out for you and it is relatively cheap for a fun day out.

 

THe Americans can have their serious stuff and mix it up with the non serious side, why can't we in the UK?  How much is NHRA to go and watch for instance?

[Jordan44]

If Bernie wants FTA coverage I'm sure he could make a deal with ITV. But does he want to...

 

Do we really want it to? Please don't take me back to those days.

[pdac]

Do we really want it to? Please don't take me back to those days.

 

Ah, Jim Rosenthal again

[johnmhinds]

Ah, Jim Rosenthal again

 

Or these stiffs:

 

[anneomoly]

I will be very surprised in subscriber numbers changed that much based on this news. If you're a F1 nut who needs to see it live, you'll already be paying.

 

Or can afford to / can justify the cost. If you've got Sky already it might not be much, but for people who have no Sky at all then £550 for 19 weekends of sport is a big outlay.

[Jordan44]

Or can afford to / can justify the cost. If you've got Sky already it might not be much, but for people who have no Sky at all then £550 for 19 weekends of sport is a big outlay.

Now TV cuts the cost drastically.

[anneomoly]

Now TV cuts the cost drastically.

 

£140 (assuming 20 races at £6.99 each, no qualifying or free practice) - so, basically, the same as the licence fee or four weekend tickets to the BTCC. With a weekend pass it's £220 a year.

 

That also assumes that you've got an internet connection that can hack a live stream (rural village, mine sometimes can, sometimes can't, and if I go down the Now TV route sometimes it's a case of having a guess as to whether it's worth it).

[Doughnut King]

I wonder how long that legacy deal (buy HD and get F1) has left. If the BBC are to drop F1 in someway, then that will likely be dropped by Sky sooner rather than later.

 

I remember seeng a lot of fans talking about taking that option above the Sports package.

 

And a week after Autosport magazine said how cheap it was to watch the minimal coverage of F1 on TV. Remember how they said the Sky deal was good for the sport? Might not be good for them if people rearrange their budgets.

Edited by Doughnut King, 24 July 2015 - 22:59.

[jonpollak]

Hmmm, I'm not sure why the government would get involved in that - after all F1 isn't a "protected event" like the olympics and Wimbledon for example.

Not doubting you for a moment but I'd be surprised if the BBC are talking to the government about rights details for Sports when they're supposed to be independant!

It ain't the BBC doing the talking here SpeedRacer.
I am afraid your government is under the influence of quite a few News Corp lobbyists, among many others.
Remembering the significance Andy Coulson had in the previous edition of CameronLand. This 'business friendly' administration has even MORE free market megaphones from London Bridge.

Jp

Edited by jonpollak, 24 July 2015 - 23:46.

[pdac]

It ain't the BBC doing the talking here SpeedRacer.
I am afraid your government is under the influence of quite a few News Corp lobbyists, among many others.
Remembering the significance Andy Coulson had in the previous edition of CameronLand. This 'business friendly' administration has even MORE free market megaphones from London Bridge.

Jp

 

So do News Corp think they can make money out of F1? Good luck to them. I will probably still pay for the basic package, but no Sky Sports for me. Goodbye F1.

[jonpollak]

I bet it's not really about just cash here....
More about breaking Auntie anyway and everywhere.

Jp

[chunder27]

The BBC are accountable to not just shareholders and shadow board members like SKY and BT are. they are accountable to the general public becaus of the licence fee.

 

They have been under massive supervision since the Saville affaur and things lie Top Gear and Jonathan Woss did not hep their cause, they got found out and hvae had to make drastic changes.

 

Why should they bid a bunch for a sport that is largely watched by the rich, certainly participated in by them and totally funded by them, there is no youth legacy for them.

 

The only reason they are screening it now is Hamilton really and Button, if there were no Brits they would have already announced they would be dropping it I am sure.

 

Theya re now the bastion of smaller sports, womens sport and lower level sports.

 

Mainly coz they cant and wont bid silly money for contracts and I applud them for it.

 

It is you the punter that is to blame for sport going behind paywalls as you are the ones that pay for it.

 

Beeb, Iplayer will be subscription based before long, it is the only way.

[Kristian]

I thought Sky's F1 show tribute to Jules was very touching yesterday. I had a tear in my eye at times. 

[johnwilliamdavies]

It will be a pity when a race like Hungary won't be able to view on FTA. Though I guess at the moment it's a 50% chance of seeing it, or not. 

[Jordan44]

It will be a pity when a race like Hungary won't be able to view on FTA. Though I guess at the moment it's a 50% chance of seeing it, or not. 

 

I'm sure we'll still be able to see it on FTA, but it'll be on a highlights show on a less mainstream channel like ITV4, the MotoGP coverage for example. 

 

No point guessing what's going to happen at this stage. The BBC will surely see out their contract until 2018 and then there will be plenty of options I'm sure.

[Alexis*27]

I've moved house so have to watch Sky on the iPad. The main TV is stuck on Freeview and it's tragic. You don't know what you've got until you've lost it.

 

So yes, paying for F1 isn't the greatest thing, but you do at least get the rest of Sky TV for your money. Freeview's '95% of the nation's top telly' claim is utter tripe in practice, no matter how factual the stats say the figure is.

[tifosiMac]

I've moved house so have to watch Sky on the iPad. The main TV is stuck on Freeview and it's tragic. You don't know what you've got until you've lost it.

 

So yes, paying for F1 isn't the greatest thing, but you do at least get the rest of Sky TV for your money. Freeview's '95% of the nation's top telly' claim is utter tripe in practice, no matter how factual the stats say the figure is.

I only watch the Sky F1 channel so the rest of it is wasted on me unless I occasionally fancy watching a film from movies. I find terrestrial channels like BBC 1, 2, 3, ITV, C4, C5 are still my most watched channels regardless of the choice available on the entire Sky package. Far too many 5 minute ad breaks and budget American documentaries/reality TV shows dominate the mainstream channels for me. 

[anneomoly]

The BBC are accountable to not just shareholders and shadow board members like SKY and BT are. they are accountable to the general public becaus of the licence fee.

 

They have been under massive supervision since the Saville affaur and things lie Top Gear and Jonathan Woss did not hep their cause, they got found out and hvae had to make drastic changes.

 

Why should they bid a bunch for a sport that is largely watched by the rich, certainly participated in by them and totally funded by them, there is no youth legacy for them.

 

The only reason they are screening it now is Hamilton really and Button, if there were no Brits they would have already announced they would be dropping it I am sure.

 

Theya re now the bastion of smaller sports, womens sport and lower level sports.

 

Mainly coz they cant and wont bid silly money for contracts and I applud them for it.

 

It is you the punter that is to blame for sport going behind paywalls as you are the ones that pay for it.

 

Beeb, Iplayer will be subscription based before long, it is the only way.

 

They've always been a bastion of smaller sports. And they grow them into bigger sports, and then they lose the commercial rights to a commercial channel.

 

They've always been the bastion of trying new things, because if they don't work they've got no angry advertising companies and if it does, they have snooker coverage, or Top Gear, or Doctor Who, or the Great British Bake Off or Strictly Come Dancing (most of which are ideas that various channels have tried to copy and failed at, with a hat tip to Dancing on Ice that was successful for a while and Fifth Gear that's really more a reincarnated old Top Gear than recently-deceased Top Gear).

[Fisico54]

I bet it's not really about just cash here....
More about breaking Auntie anyway and everywhere.

Jp

Ah ok I get it now you're grinding a political axe

[chunder27]

I do not think they realy have PUSHED any spports at all.

 

All they have done is been priced out of the market by the sports promoters and governing bodies.

 

In the 80's yu couldn not watch rugby union or league anywhere else, or cricket or even football.

 

All that happened is that the BBC were the only people invariably showing these sports and were unable or rightfully unwilling to pay the outrageous rights fees to screen them anymore.

 

They have since had to fall back onto smaller sports. Or they stop showing sport altogther and leave it all to paywalls.

[STRFerrari4Ever]

One thing I noted that the BBC is clearly better than Sky is their cinematography. Their features are beautiful and a joy to watch, Top Gear is the same too, just fantastic work.

[Kristian]

One thing I noted that the BBC is clearly better than Sky is their cinematography. Their features are beautiful and a joy to watch, Top Gear is the same too, just fantastic work.

 

That's true, its always been a strength of the BBC. 

 

Sky's constant use of slo-mo of drivers walking down the pits drives me mad too. 

[SilverArrow31]

bbc have much better intros, I like the one about the championship battle last year in Singapore by Jordon. How will you act, when the pressure is on?

[Ross Stonefeld]

Does BBC Sport do it or does a production company do it on behalf of BBC Sport?

[jonpollak]

Ah ok I get it now you're grinding a political axe

How did you get that impression Fisico?
I am about as far removed from British politics as possible.
Jp

[Fisico54]

How did you get that impression Fisico?
I am about as far removed from British politics as possible.
Jp

From your comments

[pdac]

The BBC are accountable to not just shareholders and shadow board members like SKY and BT are. they are accountable to the general public becaus of the licence fee.

 

They have been under massive supervision since the Saville affaur and things lie Top Gear and Jonathan Woss did not hep their cause, they got found out and hvae had to make drastic changes.

 

Why should they bid a bunch for a sport that is largely watched by the rich, certainly participated in by them and totally funded by them, there is no youth legacy for them.

 

The only reason they are screening it now is Hamilton really and Button, if there were no Brits they would have already announced they would be dropping it I am sure.

 

Theya re now the bastion of smaller sports, womens sport and lower level sports.

 

Mainly coz they cant and wont bid silly money for contracts and I applud them for it.

 

It is you the punter that is to blame for sport going behind paywalls as you are the ones that pay for it.

 

Beeb, Iplayer will be subscription based before long, it is the only way.

 

Maybe the BBC should take a radical step and, at a time when everyone is moving into internet streaming, they shoulld abandon it and re-focus on traditional RF broadcasting. Then, they could stop buying talent at premium prices and grow their own. That would leave them with some money in the pot to produce more quality productions.

[oetzi]

One thing I noted that the BBC is clearly better than Sky is their cinematography. Their features are beautiful and a joy to watch, Top Gear is the same too, just fantastic work.

Seeing as pretty much everyone at sky will have been trained at the BBC this is going to be a matter of style rather than competence.

[Fastcake]

Maybe the BBC should take a radical step and, at a time when everyone is moving into internet streaming, they shoulld abandon it and re-focus on traditional RF broadcasting. Then, they could stop buying talent at premium prices and grow their own. That would leave them with some money in the pot to produce more quality productions.

I can't understand how you've reached that conclusion from shutting down iplayer.

[paulrobs]

I wonder if any other FTA channel might do a highlights package and the odd race live?

[STRFerrari4Ever]

I wonder if any other FTA channel might do a highlights package and the odd race live?

I doubt it.

Let's assess the options;

Channel 4 - They produce entertaining programming but can I see them producing the same level of quality the BBC do?

ITV - Been there, done that, I don't want adverts during the race and their coverage leaves a lot to be desired. Imagine they have that clown Chiles as the presenter, I'd jump off a cliff.

5 - Definition of mediocre

[jonpollak]

From your comments

 

That's your interpretation of what I said and it's coloured by your predisposition of not understanding the angle of where my info was gathered from.

[johnmhinds]

Are FOM allowed to put the sport on pay tv only now? Or does the contract with the teams still say there needs to be a free to air option in the bigger TV markets.