Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Liberty to "turn F1 into Super Bowl"


  • Please log in to reply
1060 replies to this topic

#101 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,186 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 December 2016 - 15:49

I'd cut it because it's too long and that has lead to many GPs being irrelevant. I missed half a dozen or more GPs this year and still was able to keep up with the season.

 

What's so Grand about a sporting event which happens 21 times a year? It's just repetitive.



Advertisement

#102 LuckyStrike1

LuckyStrike1
  • Member

  • 8,659 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 30 December 2016 - 15:51

Are they (F1 community) just looking at other sporting events with a big draw and implement the strategy of "they have a lot of spectators and sponsors so let's do like they do" ?

#103 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 30 December 2016 - 18:45

I'd cut it because it's too long and that has lead to many GPs being irrelevant. I missed half a dozen or more GPs this year and still was able to keep up with the season.

 

What's so Grand about a sporting event which happens 21 times a year? It's just repetitive.

 


How has you missing some GP's made them irrelevant? Anyone could keep track of the score card without watching the race, but that means nothing.

#104 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 14,129 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 December 2016 - 19:15

V10's are history.

Embrace the future.

 

Imagine the roads in 2030, all those wonderful V6 Turbos ... what a future indeed. :p



#105 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,362 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 30 December 2016 - 19:20

Imagine the roads in 2030, all those wonderful V6 Turbos ... what a future indeed. :p

 

Considering the roads today are dominated by inline 4s, that sounds like a bright future to me.



#106 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 11,163 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 30 December 2016 - 19:21

Fixing F1 isn't difficult.

1) Make the racing better by making it easier to overtake without having to use DRS - Sporting gimmicks are never good

2) Stop the track limits nonsense - It isn't an issue in Indy Car, there's no reason for it be an issue in F1. Also stop any other rules nonsense - Grid penalties could easily be changed into constructor points deductions. Stop messing with the racing!

3) Put it on free TV. I know plenty of people, casual sport fans, who don't watch F1 now but they used to

4) Go to circuits where people actually turn up to watch the race. How great does Mexico look with packed grandstands? Spa was full of fans this year and the director made sure we saw it constantly throughout the race. Was anyone even there at Baku?

5) Expanding the number of races in the US isn't a bad thing if it works. The sport market there is huge and so is the sponsorship potential. Let's also not forget that F1 IS western Europe. At least 50% of the races have to be in western Europe.

6) If you want to spice up the weekend, make it an event - great. Publicity breads interest and sponsorship

7) Make the payments fairer. A team like Force India shouldn't be struggling financially.

Now that you have fixed F1, can you come and sort out once and for all, the issues in the Middle East ? :p 



#107 Pete_f1

Pete_f1
  • Member

  • 1,216 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 30 December 2016 - 20:16

I look forward to the five competition cautions so the various networks can take a break.

Maybe a public vote on which of three punishments a driver should get.

Or long winded sponser named races, like 'The not made from wheat but made from oats insted-a-bix British Grand Prix of Silverstone'.

#108 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,634 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 30 December 2016 - 20:24

Other than the track limits stuff (more linked the the FIA than the promoter) the article covers all of those things.

The trouble is you can't do much about the other stuff because Bernie has spent the last few years doing really awful deals and locking the tracks/teams/tv companies into multi year contracts and bending over and letting the teams have too much control over the regulations to get them to vote his way.

It isn't going to be easy to walk back from all of the mess he made.

 

You are seriously proposing that the commercial/TV rights holder should have more control over regulations?

 

You dont think, for instance, that that is a disastrously stupid idea?



#109 D28

D28
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 30 December 2016 - 20:38

 

 

As for getting hooked on F1 with pay TV, that's where I found F1. SPEED TV wasn't free when I found F1 there. Most people these days have pay tv, often with packages that include F1.

I'm not sure what is meant  by "free" TV perhaps someone can give a definition, or explanation of how tv is broadcast in Britain for instance.

In Canada over the air broadcast disappeared about 4 years ago; there may technically be some way to source digital signal with an areal, but this would be a minority situation and content would be severely limited.

The vast number of viewers subscribe to a cable company for their signal; the number of channels and packages is up to the customer, but none of it is free, or even cheap.  F1 locally has been available on a popular sports package for many years, it is the BBC package.

And this is not pay for view, one does not have to subscribe to each  race separately.

 

I assume that USA has a similar situation with regard to cable TV. over the air broadcast to aerials must be  something of the past.

 

I am with AustinF1 on this, people calling for "free" broadcast of F1, what do you really mean?



#110 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 30 December 2016 - 21:00

I'm not sure what is meant  by "free" TV perhaps someone can give a definition, or explanation of how tv is broadcast in Britain for instance.

In Canada over the air broadcast disappeared about 4 years ago; there may technically be some way to source digital signal with an areal, but this would be a minority situation and content would be severely limited.

The vast number of viewers subscribe to a cable company for their signal; the number of channels and packages is up to the customer, but none of it is free, or even cheap.  F1 locally has been available on a popular sports package for many years, it is the BBC package.

And this is not pay for view, one does not have to subscribe to each  race separately.

 

I assume that USA has a similar situation with regard to cable TV. over the air broadcast to aerials must be  something of the past.

 

I am with AustinF1 on this, people calling for "free" broadcast of F1, what do you really mean?

 


In Britain we have to pay for a TV license, this funds the BBC channels and subsides some others. There are a large number of channels that are broadcast over the air or via Satelite that there is no further charge for. These would be FTA (Free To Air), as opposed to a subscription channel. F1 has, for the most part been on one of the FTA channels, but is gradually moving to a subscription only channel.

Edited by Clatter, 30 December 2016 - 21:02.


#111 ClubmanGT

ClubmanGT
  • Member

  • 2,021 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 30 December 2016 - 21:21

Considering the roads today are dominated by inline 4s, that sounds like a bright future to me.

 

What's wrong with the inline four? You're never going to see hybrid V6Ts all the way through a vehicle fleet because of the battery tech involved. 



#112 ClubmanGT

ClubmanGT
  • Member

  • 2,021 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 30 December 2016 - 21:23

3) Put it on free TV. I know plenty of people, casual sport fans, who don't watch F1 now but they used to
 

 

Do you mean 'put it on FTA TV in Britain' or everywhere; because if it's free somewhere, everyone else ends up invariably paying more to make up for it. 



#113 D28

D28
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 30 December 2016 - 21:48

In Britain we have to pay for a TV license, this funds the BBC channels and subsides some others. There are a large number of channels that are broadcast over the air or via Satelite that there is no further charge for. These would be FTA (Free To Air), as opposed to a subscription channel. F1 has, for the most part been on one of the FTA channels, but is gradually moving to a subscription only channel.

Thanks for the description. That is a different system to Can and I suspect USA. Canada never had a license requirement.  in earlier decades one simply pugged in and hooked up an aerial and received signal depending  on the proximity to a broadcasting tower, That is now gone and one requires a cable subscription or a satellite  dish. I suspect the UK license is cheaper than a cable subscription here; 

In any event "free" broadcast of F1 or anything else really is a non starter. Interesting to know about other countries.



#114 FLB

FLB
  • Member

  • 8,819 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 30 December 2016 - 21:54

I know it's Formula E, but this may give an idea of where Liberty want to be heading:

 

http://www.autosport...fter-vegas-test



#115 Lotus53B

Lotus53B
  • Member

  • 4,163 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 30 December 2016 - 22:04

Getting off topic, but I seem to remember that an inline or v- 4 was the original choice for current formula but it was rejected as they block would have been too small to be part of the monocoque, and space frame or similar would be needed.

Anyways, It's all probably irrelevant.  I was reading on the grauniad site an article that was persuasively arguining that it is seeming inevitable that scheduled, ubiquitous channels are likely to go the way of the dodo in the medium term future, and we all better get used to it.  And with that change, the attention span of viewers is likely to become increasingly ephemeral, and shows longer than 1 hour or so will have to be variety shows, and mainly feature short sprints, not long-winded strategic battles



#116 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,362 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 30 December 2016 - 22:28

What's wrong with the inline four? You're never going to see hybrid V6Ts all the way through a vehicle fleet because of the battery tech involved. 

 

Nothing, but if Nonesuch thinks V6T hybrids becoming standard will be boring, then today's roads must also be very boring.



#117 highdownforce

highdownforce
  • Member

  • 4,257 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 30 December 2016 - 22:32

$5 million ads?



#118 automovelbrilhante

automovelbrilhante
  • Member

  • 302 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 30 December 2016 - 22:45

All this fluff worries me. If the racing is crap, who honestly cares? Let's get a financially sustainable series with multiple strong teams and drivers not made mute by corporate leashes. Let's see some personality and emotion. If the action is interesting you won't need to pay a clown like Bieber to mime, the crowds will come. Racing fans are drawn to racing.

This, but also the fluff.

Edited by automovelbrilhante, 31 December 2016 - 03:05.


#119 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 00:08

In Britain we have to pay for a TV license, this funds the BBC channels and subsides some others. There are a large number of channels that are broadcast over the air or via Satelite that there is no further charge for. These would be FTA (Free To Air), as opposed to a subscription channel. F1 has, for the most part been on one of the FTA channels, but is gradually moving to a subscription only channel.

 

You forgot to also mention that there are several subscriptions services also available that are quite popular now, but F1 is moving to Sky Sports, which is a rather large additional charge on top of the standard Sky subscription service. So not only will it no longer be on a FTA channel but it also won't be on the standard subscription services either.



Advertisement

#120 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 00:40

You forgot to also mention that there are several subscriptions services also available that are quite popular now, but F1 is moving to Sky Sports, which is a rather large additional charge on top of the standard Sky subscription service. So not only will it no longer be on a FTA channel but it also won't be on the standard subscription services either.

I said it was moving to a subscription only channel. I don't think it needed anymore detail than that for the explanation required.

#121 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 02:37

I said it was moving to a subscription only channel. I don't think it needed anymore detail than that for the explanation required.

 

I think there's a difference between a regular subscription channel and a premium subscription add-on package. It's one level beyond ...

 

Tier 1: FTA

Tier 2: Subscription basic services

Tier 3: Subscription standard services

Tier 4: Subscription services + premium services

 

Not so long ago F1 was available live and uninterrupted at tier 1

Now F1 is available with some races live and uninterrupted at tier 1 and others highlights (with ad breaks) at tier 1. All races are available live and uninterrupted at tier 4

Soon races will only be live and uninterrupted at tier 4. It's possible that highlights (with ad breaks) might be available at tier 2 or 3 in the future, but no details yet.

 

The difference is clear, though:

 

Tier 1: £145pa (TV license fee)

Tier 2: £145pa (TV license fee) + £240pa (Sky 'original' as an example) = £385pa

Tier 3: £145pa (TV license fee) + £384pa (Sky 'variety' as an example) = £529pa

Tier 4: £145pa (TV license fee) + £240pa (Sky 'original' as an example) + £330pa (Sky Sports add-on) = £715

 

And that's not including HD or multi-room options. There's a big difference between £145 with 'FTA' and £715



#122 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 5,233 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 31 December 2016 - 03:54

It always cracks me up when the Brits call their form of pay TV "free to air".  Were it truly free,  the license fee wouldn't be compulsory.  We can argue the merits and quantity of programming included with the license fee but you are still paying for the privilege to watch TV.  Over the air.  Not for free.   Pay to be able to watch TV.   I can understand the complaints about Sky being terribly expensive to get F1 because, well, it is.  But with the requirement of a TV license F1 hasn't been "free" in Britain.  



#123 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 11,163 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 03:56

Has anybody said,' Balls ! ' yet ?



#124 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 12,401 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 03:57

I know it's Formula E, but this may give an idea of where Liberty want to be heading:

 

http://www.autosport...fter-vegas-test

 

Liberty are part-owners of FE, right?



#125 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 5,233 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 31 December 2016 - 04:05

I assume that USA has a similar situation with regard to cable TV. over the air broadcast to aerials must be  something of the past.

 

The system in the US is similar to what you use in Canada because, well, we invented it.  Packages that don't quite have everything you want to watch and a limited (or no) ability to buy programming a la carte at a pretty steep price.  You're welcome...   :rotfl:

 

The modern cable/sat model was pioneered here and one of the chaps that perfected that model and made a ton of money from it is buying Delta Topco and with it the commercial rights to F1.  Liberty is technically a big, publicly traded company but the way it's structured is that one guy can call the shots.  The other people that have skin in the game like that because he's pretty good at it.  Everyone makes money.  One way or the other, if your market can sustain it you'll be paying for access.



#126 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 5,233 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 31 December 2016 - 04:08

Liberty are part-owners of FE, right?

I'm going to be on the show floor at CES, I'd planned to check it out.  I didn't find out about it until I got my badge confirmation a few days ago.  I didn't realize it was going to be a higher key event.  I thought it was just one of those dog and pony shows we see at trade shows these days.



#127 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 12:51

I think there's a difference between a regular subscription channel and a premium subscription add-on package. It's one level beyond ...

 

Tier 1: FTA

Tier 2: Subscription basic services

Tier 3: Subscription standard services

Tier 4: Subscription services + premium services

 

Not so long ago F1 was available live and uninterrupted at tier 1

Now F1 is available with some races live and uninterrupted at tier 1 and others highlights (with ad breaks) at tier 1. All races are available live and uninterrupted at tier 4

Soon races will only be live and uninterrupted at tier 4. It's possible that highlights (with ad breaks) might be available at tier 2 or 3 in the future, but no details yet.

 

The difference is clear, though:

 

Tier 1: £145pa (TV license fee)

Tier 2: £145pa (TV license fee) + £240pa (Sky 'original' as an example) = £385pa

Tier 3: £145pa (TV license fee) + £384pa (Sky 'variety' as an example) = £529pa

Tier 4: £145pa (TV license fee) + £240pa (Sky 'original' as an example) + £330pa (Sky Sports add-on) = £715

 

And that's not including HD or multi-room options. There's a big difference between £145 with 'FTA' and £715

 


Please look at the post I was replying to. I don't think this level of detail is required, as they just wanted an idea of how things work in the UK, not a breakdown of the prices.

#128 tormave

tormave
  • Member

  • 1,508 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 31 December 2016 - 12:55

Unlike many in this thread, I'm actually a fan of both F1 and NFL. Making F1 more like Superbowl is silly, because Superbowl is a once in a year final game. How about making F1 more like NFL?

NFL is covered live on free-to-air television: good
All NFL action is covered live in HD online via Internet (globally, but not in US): good
NFL features frequent breaks in action, which are commercial breaks on TV: not good
NFL is brilliantly filmed from every possible angle: good
NFL collects and displays a boatload of real-time statistics: good
NFL tickets are super expensive: not good
NFL is very dangerous for the athletes, but yet it attracts the very best of them: mixed
NFL is actually a sport: good
NFL has a salary cap and draft system, which puts all teams on a level starting point at the start of the year: good

#129 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 12:57

It always cracks me up when the Brits call their form of pay TV "free to air".  Were it truly free,  the license fee wouldn't be compulsory.  We can argue the merits and quantity of programming included with the license fee but you are still paying for the privilege to watch TV.  Over the air.  Not for free.   Pay to be able to watch TV.   I can understand the complaints about Sky being terribly expensive to get F1 because, well, it is.  But with the requirement of a TV license F1 hasn't been "free" in Britain.  

 

I agree.

 

I think (can't find any confirmation, though) that the license fee originally had to be paid in one lump sum and that continued into the time when subscription services became available. So people didn't think of this payment in the same way (you just paid it every year). Once subscription services came about, you then had a situation where the traditional service was 'free' compared to the subscription services. Hence FTA.



#130 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 13:02

Please look at the post I was replying to. I don't think this level of detail is required, as they just wanted an idea of how things work in the UK, not a breakdown of the prices.

 

The original post made reference to F1 too. I just wanted to add some detail to make it clear where F1 currently fits into the UK model and where it will be moving to. I'm not sure why you keep calling me up on this, though.



#131 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 26,152 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 13:53

Pay him no nevermind pdac.

 

I appreciated your cost breakdown and I am sure others did as well.

 

Jp



#132 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 14:29

The original post made reference to F1 too. I just wanted to add some detail to make it clear where F1 currently fits into the UK model and where it will be moving to. I'm not sure why you keep calling me up on this, though.

That's fine, but it was you telling me I had forgotten it. I hadn't, and just provided the background requested.

#133 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,186 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 31 December 2016 - 16:09

How has you missing some GP's made them irrelevant? Anyone could keep track of the score card without watching the race, but that means nothing.

 

 

Irrelevant, maybe something else such as unimportant. My point is too many GPs simply leave the calendar saturated.

Which is actually one lesson F1 could take from NFL, keep the calendar tight to make each event meaningful. Each team plays on 16 games in the regular season. It barely coveres 4 months. With only 8 home games, fans opportunities to see their teams play become less abundant and naturally more valuable. And some rival teams meet only every 4 years, which automatically grants certain games a "must watch" status.

 

Of course I do not suggest a 16GP season spread through 4 months, but F1 should try to become more valuable even if more rare instead of trying to become omnipresent.

 

My calendar would look like:

 

01 - Bahrain, I don't like it but their money is welcome, they should be encouraged to pay whatever ridiculous fee possible for the season opener priviledge and perhaps subsidize a test session

02 - Interlagos

03 - Mexico

04 - Spain, not necessarily Barcelona, which sufferes from its layout and all the testing already done

05 - Monaco

06 - USA, Austin, ideally before it's too hot, so early june.

07 - Canada, Montreal

08 - Paul Ricard

09 - Silverstone

10 - A1 Ring

11 - Hungaroring

12 - Spa

13 - Monza

14 - Baku, I kind of liked it

15 - Singapore

16 - Suzuka

17 - Melbourne

18 - Abu Dhabi,  I don't like it but their money is welcome, they should be encouraged to pay whatever ridiculous fee possible for the season finale priviledge and perhaps subsidize a test session.

 

I find this calendar reasonable and possible without crampoing the TV schedules to the point of exaustion. It doesn't visit the whole world, but that's an impossible goal people should not be fixated with. Still, some rotations could be set on 5 year schedule so the calendar doesn't grow stale. Between Baku and Russia, and/or Austria and Germany, or even France and Spain. Something like that.


Edited by Atreiu, 31 December 2016 - 16:10.


#134 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,257 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 31 December 2016 - 17:01

You're kinda missing the point, they aren't bringing up the Super Bowl to say that they want the F1 races themselves to be rarer and more special.

 

They've only been mentioning the Super Bowl to give an example of a sporting event that is surrounded by unrelated fluff that they can make some more money from.

 

The pin board in the Liberty Media headquarters looks like this but with the F1 logo in the middle:

 

2016-Super-Bowl-Commercials-List.jpg



#135 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 31 December 2016 - 17:23

I don't see how that will improve anything, other than their profit margin.

#136 FLB

FLB
  • Member

  • 8,819 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 31 December 2016 - 17:50

Liberty are part-owners of FE, right?

Yup. Liberty Global is a sister company to Liberty Media.

 

Which is why I think Formula E will be (or is) a marketing laboratory for F1 and that the gamers' thing at Las Vegas is a trial balloon.


Edited by FLB, 31 December 2016 - 17:51.


#137 hlz15

hlz15
  • Member

  • 113 posts
  • Joined: December 16

Posted 31 December 2016 - 18:05

Do you mean 'put it on FTA TV in Britain' or everywhere; because if it's free somewhere, everyone else ends up invariably paying more to make up for it. 

The broadcaster still has to pay for it whether or not it is subscribers, licensee fee payers or advertisers paying them.



#138 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 12,401 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 18:39

 

06 - USA, Austin, ideally before it's too hot, so early june.

Early June in Austin is too hot.

 

 I mean, it's not too hot to race. It could be done,  but it's too hot for a big crowd. V8SC in May was very hot. Too hot.


Edited by AustinF1, 31 December 2016 - 18:41.


#139 jokuvaan

jokuvaan
  • Member

  • 4,091 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 31 December 2016 - 18:39

Hopefully this eventually opens a official non-pay stream-tv with ads. Opening the live sector data would be first step to correct Bernie's mistakes.



Advertisement

#140 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,547 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 31 December 2016 - 20:24

More fluff means more visibility, which means more viewers and money for everyone. It's a bit different if you have the likes of coca cola and apple promoting f1 compared to lucozade and acer. Now we have teams like mclaren without a title sponsor and bare racing overalls.

#141 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,186 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 31 December 2016 - 20:55

Early June in Austin is too hot.

 

 I mean, it's not too hot to race. It could be done,  but it's too hot for a big crowd. V8SC in May was very hot. Too hot.

 

 

Hum, ok. Maybe it should be put earlier. A week after the Indy 500? I dunno. But I think it'd better if it was held while the championship was on full swing and still wide open.



#142 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 4,555 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 20:56

I'm surprised this is so difficult for people to compute.

 

The Super Bowl is more than just the game, its a week long spectacle.  Host cities have football and non-football related events all over the place.  Anyone who has been to the Canadian GP in Montreal might be able to understand what Liberty wants to do at all the races.  They want GP's to be a wide ranging event, not just 3 days of cars circling a race track in the middle of the countryside.  When Taylor Swift takes a break from her vacation to do one show for the USGP, that tells Taylor Swift fans the USGP is something of a big deal.  Liberty wants to add general attractions because it attracts people that otherwise wouldn't give a $#!^ F1 is in town.  Add something they do care about to the festivities are they will be more included to see what this F1 thing is all about.  The more spice and jazz you add to an event, the more important it will appear.  It's textbook stuff.  What does a 10-minute concert have to do with a football game? Nothing, but consider the number of people that watch the Super Bowl because of the half-time concert, the special ads, and because so many people are excited about it.  People are sheep, Liberty wants to make a broader pasture that appeals to more sheep.

 

 

What's so Grand about a sporting event which happens 21 times a year? It's just repetitive.

 

The fact each country only hosts one..?  Whether there are 15 or 20 GPs in a season, it doesn't make the British GP any less special to the person going to the race.  I've been going to Montreal since there were 17 races on the calendar, now that there are 21 it doesn't make my week long experience anything less.



#143 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,186 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 31 December 2016 - 21:32

The spectators in the crowd are just a tiny fraction of all spectators. F1 gets its money from TV and the presumed dozens and dozens of millions specttors, not ticket sales. So 21 GPs and saturation is a problem.

 

 



#144 thegforcemaybewithyou

thegforcemaybewithyou
  • Member

  • 2,414 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 31 December 2016 - 21:45

FI Season MMXVII

#145 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 12,401 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 22:35

Hum, ok. Maybe it should be put earlier. A week after the Indy 500? I dunno. But I think it'd better if it was held while the championship was on full swing and still wide open.

Maybe, but also remember, COTA wants it in the fall. It's not just Bernie/FOM.


Edited by AustinF1, 31 December 2016 - 22:41.


#146 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 12,401 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 22:40

I'm surprised this is so difficult for people to compute.

 

The Super Bowl is more than just the game, its a week long spectacle.  Host cities have football and non-football related events all over the place.  Anyone who has been to the Canadian GP in Montreal might be able to understand what Liberty wants to do at all the races.  They want GP's to be a wide ranging event, not just 3 days of cars circling a race track in the middle of the countryside.  When Taylor Swift takes a break from her vacation to do one show for the USGP, that tells Taylor Swift fans the USGP is something of a big deal.  Liberty wants to add general attractions because it attracts people that otherwise wouldn't give a $#!^ F1 is in town.  Add something they do care about to the festivities are they will be more included to see what this F1 thing is all about.  The more spice and jazz you add to an event, the more important it will appear.  It's textbook stuff.  What does a 10-minute concert have to do with a football game? Nothing, but consider the number of people that watch the Super Bowl because of the half-time concert, the special ads, and because so many people are excited about it.  People are sheep, Liberty wants to make a broader pasture that appeals to more sheep.

 

 

The fact each country only hosts one..?  Whether there are 15 or 20 GPs in a season, it doesn't make the British GP any less special to the person going to the race.  I've been going to Montreal since there were 17 races on the calendar, now that there are 21 it doesn't make my week long experience anything less.

I don't disagree with the post in general, and Montreal, Melbourne, etc, have been doing this kind of thing for a long time. It's nothing new, and COTA and Liberty haven't reinvented the wheel here. 

 

Re: Taylor Swift in Austin though, what we saw here was that what Taylor Swift fans saw was an opportunity to see TS, and it just happened to be at some race track after the day's track sessions were long over. Probably 95% of the concert crowd arrived after 95% of the racing crowd was already gone and the rest were leaving. They really couldn't have cared less where the concert was held or what else was going on there earlier in the day.


Edited by AustinF1, 31 December 2016 - 22:40.


#147 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 22:56

More fluff means more visibility, which means more viewers and money for everyone. It's a bit different if you have the likes of coca cola and apple promoting f1 compared to lucozade and acer. Now we have teams like mclaren without a title sponsor and bare racing overalls.

 


Do you think people watch F1 because of who the sponsors are?

#148 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 23:01

I'm surprised this is so difficult for people to compute.

 

The Super Bowl is more than just the game, its a week long spectacle.  Host cities have football and non-football related events all over the place.  Anyone who has been to the Canadian GP in Montreal might be able to understand what Liberty wants to do at all the races.  They want GP's to be a wide ranging event, not just 3 days of cars circling a race track in the middle of the countryside.  When Taylor Swift takes a break from her vacation to do one show for the USGP, that tells Taylor Swift fans the USGP is something of a big deal.  Liberty wants to add general attractions because it attracts people that otherwise wouldn't give a $#!^ F1 is in town.  Add something they do care about to the festivities are they will be more included to see what this F1 thing is all about.  The more spice and jazz you add to an event, the more important it will appear.  It's textbook stuff.  What does a 10-minute concert have to do with a football game? Nothing, but consider the number of people that watch the Super Bowl because of the half-time concert, the special ads, and because so many people are excited about it.  People are sheep, Liberty wants to make a broader pasture that appeals to more sheep.

 

 

The fact each country only hosts one..?  Whether there are 15 or 20 GPs in a season, it doesn't make the British GP any less special to the person going to the race.  I've been going to Montreal since there were 17 races on the calendar, now that there are 21 it doesn't make my week long experience anything less.

 


I can understand how they can make Montreal a week long experience, but that's because it's within a heart beat of a major city. Many of the tracks are effectively in the middle of nowhere and I really can't see the same being recreated everywhere.

#149 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 12,401 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 31 December 2016 - 23:09

I can understand how they can make Montreal a week long experience, but that's because it's within a heart beat of a major city. Many of the tracks are effectively in the middle of nowhere and I really can't see the same being recreated everywhere.

o/t Taking my family to Montreal this year. Wife knows, but boys don't know yet. Gonna surprise them. Can't wait to show them what a different experience it is from COTA. Love everything about the Montreal race week experience.



#150 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 31 December 2016 - 23:18

o/t Taking my family to Montreal this year. Wife knows, but boys don't know yet. Gonna surprise them. Can't wait to show them what a different experience it is from COTA. Love everything about the Montreal race week experience.

 


I'd love to do it. I can only go by what I see on TV and read about it, but I know 100% they could not recreate it at Silverstone. Look forward to hearing about your experiences.