211 replies to this topic

[johnwilliamdavies]

https://johnwallstre...a-one-for-sale/

 

 

 

Less than 3 years after Liberty Global acquired Formula One, the company is reportedly exploring scenarios that would decrease their stake in the international racing circuit; everything from an exit to the introduction of new equity partners in on the table. Liberty has failed to add races (see: Miami) and/or major sponsors, attract younger fans (fact: just 14% are < 25 years old) or drive digital revenues (.06% of total revenue in ‘18); issues that collectively indicate the C-suite is in over their heads and taking direction from the wrong places. Keep an eye on former owner Bernie Ecclestone, the British business magnate has the capital, know-how and can likely reclaim the asset back for a fraction of the $8 billion he sold it for.

[Myrvold]

That was quick.

 

But it is also a blog as a source?

[FLB]

That was quick.

 

But it is also a blog as a source?

Let's see. But what they seem to be proposing would explain why people aren't exactly in a hurry to solve the 2021 regulations' issues.

 

Plus, Bernie was hanging around Vettel this past weekend in Kitzbuhel. I'm sure if he can taste blood (i.e. a deal), he'll find a way...

Edited by FLB, 27 January 2019 - 20:04.

[ArrowsLivery]

I would rather see them close down F1 than sell it back to Bernard. 

[Myrvold]

Let's see. But what they seem to be proposing would explain why people aren't exactly in a hurry to solve the 2021 regulations' issues.

That's a thing for me though. I must admit I don't know the exact details of the deal between Bernie and Mosley. But, shouldn't the FIA just be able to get the rules set, and let the promoter... promote the series?

[Risil]

This scenario sounds very similar to what happened when Mr Burns sold his power plant to German businessmen.

[pRy]

It could just be a rumour that is being pushed by a blog. My initial thought was it's far too early for them to be making a judgement call. But after thinking about it, it actually wouldn't surprise me. Their Managing Director of Commercial Operations openly admits to not being a "petrol head" and clearly has no clue about the sport prior to when they became interested in buying it.

 

They thought they could come in, throw around a bunch of flash sounding terms and immediately see digital and revenue growth. I suspect they've realised it ain't that easy. Something I'm sure Bernard could have told them. 

[boillot]

Liberty has been a disppointment overall.

But, why does a racing series need an owner after all?

The best thing that may happen would be for the whole thing to collapse like in 1952 and then a new healthy series to be created, sanctioned by FIA.

No manufacturers needed (although welcome), very open tech rules, open testing, restricted use of wind tunnel and computers.

Let the races be negotiated individually as before 1981. Much less money, much more fun.

And don't let Bernie nowhere near.

Edited by boillot, 27 January 2019 - 21:24.

[azza200]

How long before they create a play-off feature in F1 like in Nascar 

[JHSingo]

I am a fan of Liberty Media. There, I said it. I think they're a good owner for the sport - they're actually trying to help improve it. Whether you agree or not with what they're doing is irrelevant. I think it's much better than having somebody like CVC, who, for years, did nothing but take an obscene amount of money out of the sport. I'd rather Liberty stick around as long as possible than see a return of a CVC-type owner.

 

Yes, they've not achieved what they set out to do - yet. But I think to criticise them for not getting more young people interested after just three years in charge, when pretty much every single sport you can think of is suffering that exact same problem, is unfair. Give them a chance - things aren't going to change overnight, particularly given the state Bernie/CVC left the sport in.

[TomNokoe]

Wouldn't surprise me. Typical F1.

[Beri]

I am a fan of Liberty Media. There, I said it. I think they're a good owner for the sport - they're actually trying to help improve it. Whether you agree or not with what they're doing is irrelevant. I think it's much better than having somebody like CVC, who, for years, did nothing but take an obscene amount of money out of the sport. I'd rather Liberty stick around as long as possible than see a return of a CVC-type owner.

Yes, they've not achieved what they set out to do - yet. But I think to criticise them for not getting more young people interested after just three years in charge, when pretty much every single sport you can think of is suffering that exact same problem, is unfair. Give them a chance - things aren't going to change overnight, particularly given the state Bernie/CVC left the sport in.

To be fair, Liberty does try to enhance the entertainment value. But there lies my biggest criticism; Formula One is a sport, not a circus full of entertainment. In a sport there can only be one winner and there will always be a number last. In any sport, there are no equal playing fields. There is always one element that is bound to be in favor of someone. And yes, if you add half a billion elements (the estimated budget of Mercedes), then the odds are in favor of you.

[PayasYouRace]

I am a fan of Liberty Media. There, I said it. I think they're a good owner for the sport - they're actually trying to help improve it. Whether you agree or not with what they're doing is irrelevant. I think it's much better than having somebody like CVC, who, for years, did nothing but take an obscene amount of money out of the sport. I'd rather Liberty stick around as long as possible than see a return of a CVC-type owner.

 

Yes, they've not achieved what they set out to do - yet. But I think to criticise them for not getting more young people interested after just three years in charge, when pretty much every single sport you can think of is suffering that exact same problem, is unfair. Give them a chance - things aren't going to change overnight, particularly given the state Bernie/CVC left the sport in.

 

Yeah I don't think Liberty have done all that bad a job compared to what has come before. Some of their ideas have been duds but at least they're doing more than CVC were doing.

 

My main worry is that they'll continue to take the sport away from it's traditional races.

[Loosenut]

I doubt Bernie would want it back anyway, he sold it at the right time for him.

F1's future doesn't look so certain right now, with car manufacturers perfering to do FE. If it loses just one of it's remaining engine suppliers, it'll be in real trouble..

[pdac]

All just rumour, but I would not be surprised to hear that Liberty are struggling to steer F1 in their direction. I think they may have failed to understand just what an old-boys club the whole thing is and just how much power the other parties actually hold.

[JHSingo]

To be fair, Liberty does try to enhance the entertainment value. But there lies my biggest criticism; Formula One is a sport, not a circus full of entertainment. In a sport there can only be one winner and there will always be a number last. In any sport, there are no equal playing fields. There is always one element that is bound to be in favor of someone. And yes, if you add half a billion elements (the estimated budget of Mercedes), then the odds are in favor of you.

 

But remaining entertaining is crucial for the sport's survival. Put simply, if enough people fail to find it entertaining any more, it won't exist very much longer.

 

I'd be against any introduction of reversed grids or success ballast, but equally, seeing Mercedes go on winning for several more years (which is a distinct possibility, while ever these engines are used) has very little appeal to me either. I want to see different teams and drivers winning. I want more than two or three drivers capable of competing for the title.

 

Saying all that, I struggle to think of anything that Liberty has done that has made me shudder with revulsion, or feel that they were changing the sport beyond recognition. I find the "F1 theme" and dramatic grid graphics cheesy and cringe worthy as hell, but it's not a deal-breaker for me.

[Maxioos]

Does Liberty own all? If I remember correct part was financed by bonds and/or external parties. I seem to remember some of those put their share on the market or did sold or minimized their part short couple month after the buy. But not in position to check if my memory is correct or not, so just dropping it to see if others know.

[Sterzo]

Does Liberty own all? If I remember correct part was financed by bonds and/or external parties.

That's always the case with these major business deals. The key point is that Liberty control it. Bonds (for example) represent a financial investment but don't give voting rights. Minority shareholdings do give voting rights, but the votes are academic if there's a controlling shareholder; again they're an investment.

[noikeee]

I am a fan of Liberty Media. There, I said it. I think they're a good owner for the sport - they're actually trying to help improve it. Whether you agree or not with what they're doing is irrelevant. I think it's much better than having somebody like CVC, who, for years, did nothing but take an obscene amount of money out of the sport. I'd rather Liberty stick around as long as possible than see a return of a CVC-type owner.

 

Yes, they've not achieved what they set out to do - yet. But I think to criticise them for not getting more young people interested after just three years in charge, when pretty much every single sport you can think of is suffering that exact same problem, is unfair. Give them a chance - things aren't going to change overnight, particularly given the state Bernie/CVC left the sport in.

 

Yeah I agree. I mean don't get me wrong they're still trying to make a buck out of us, they're hardly a charity or benevolent saints looking over the fans' interests. But that's what would happen with any owner, and so far they look like the lesser evil compared to Bernie's reign.

 

I think a lot of problems they're having are inherited and a consequence of the power stalemate Bernie had cornered himself into with the recent deals before he left. I lost track of how it all works given how confusing it got, the Strategy Group, the situation with the Concordes, the special deals with some teams, the way the voting works... it's all a massive cluster****.

[kumo7]

Actual fear would be that indeed the death of the boss...

[RA2]

 

My main worry is that they'll continue to take the sport away from it's traditional races.

 

 

9 tracks of the 21 is in proper Europe

Another 5 are in Australia, Canada, USA, Brazil and Japan

2 more are very popular in Singapore and Mexico

 

So there are 5 races in regions that are currently in areas you dont like

 

Even if they add 4 more in regions you call backward that is still 16 to 9. Is that a cause for you to WORRY???

Edited by RA2, 28 January 2019 - 05:56.

[djparky]

They inherited quite a few problems from the old era, and they're struggling with that legacy- rules making process, sanctioning fees, costs of competing etc

[Maxioos]

That's always the case with these major business deals. The key point is that Liberty control it. Bonds (for example) represent a financial investment but don't give voting rights. Minority shareholdings do give voting rights, but the votes are academic if there's a controlling shareholder; again they're an investment.

 

Yeah, i understand that. I was more wondering if one of those parties might possible be interested to increase their shares/influence?

[PayasYouRace]

9 tracks of the 21 is in proper Europe

Another 5 are in Australia, Canada, USA, Brazil and Japan

2 more are very popular in Singapore and Mexico

 

So there are 5 races in regions that are currently in areas you dont like

 

Even if they add 4 more in regions you call backward that is still 16 to 9. Is that a cause for you to WORRY???

 

I never said anything about regions I don't like and definitely never said anywhere was "backward".

 

But I do believe the world championship should represent the countries that contribute most to world motorsport and not abandon its history. I worry because Liberty seem more concerned about expanding to places that have neither of those things over protecting important races such as the British or German Grands Prix. Also because the teams are already stretched to their limit with a 20 race calendar and will be fighting against expanding to 25 so something will have to go.

 

Luckily in recent years we returned to Austria, Mexico and France, but at least the first two were added before Liberty took over.

[Nonesuch]

If this is a serious issue, the decision is probably coming from higher up. Wasn't Carey talking about a long-term plan? It seems silly that they wouldn't attempt to make significant changes for 2021, at least.

 

Either way - perhaps best to wait for some more concrete information. Anyone can start a rumour!

[RA2]

I never said anything about regions I don't like and definitely never said anywhere was "backward".

But I do believe the world championship should represent the countries that contribute most to world motorsport and not abandon its history. I worry because Liberty seem more concerned about expanding to places that have neither of those things over protecting important races such as the British or German Grands Prix. Also because the teams are already stretched to their limit with a 20 race calendar and will be fighting against expanding to 25 so something will have to go.

Luckily in recent years we returned to Austria, Mexico and France, but at least the first two were added before Liberty took over.

You have 15 of 21 races that represent the places with adequate tradition

How many more does f1 need?

Can F1 in these markets alone contribute to increase in viewers?

[7MGTEsup]

Unfortunately F1 is like an oil tanker at sea, it has a lot of mass and wont change direction quickly. I think they were naive if they though they could come in and change it all in a short period. They will need to win lots of small battles before they can win the war.

[maximilian]

Formula One is a sport, not a circus full of entertainment. 

 

Primarily, F1 is a BUSINESS.  All other aspects come below that.

[ConsiderAndGo]

The article talks about Liberty Global, not Liberty Media.

 

Global do not own F1.

[Beri]

Primarily, F1 is a BUSINESS.  All other aspects come below that.

And there lies the problem of modern F1.

[jstrains]

I was searching for headlines about Daytona 500 on cnn.com but from motor racing the first headline was that Rita Ora visited FE. It seems that it is getting quite attention and popular (FE). Who knows what the future brings for F1... either F1 goes fully electric or the stars switch to FE.

Edited by jstrains, 28 January 2019 - 11:59.

[7MGTEsup]

I was searching for headlines about Daytona 500 on cnn.com but from motor racing the first headline was that Rita Ora visited FE. It seems that it is getting quite attention and popular (FE). Who knows what the future brings for F1... either F1 goes fully electric or the stars switch to FE.

 

Wonder how much she got paid? Is she even famous outside the UK?

Edited by 7MGTEsup, 28 January 2019 - 12:02.

[jstrains]

That came to my mind too. Maybe she even did not know what she attended but she is a friend of Lewis so I think she knew 

Edited by jstrains, 28 January 2019 - 12:05.

[Beri]

Who..?

[JHSingo]

I was searching for headlines about Daytona 500 on cnn.com but from motor racing the first headline was that Rita Ora visited FE. It seems that it is getting quite attention and popular (FE). Who knows what the future brings for F1... either F1 goes fully electric or the stars switch to FE.

 

I think you'll find it hard to find headlines about the Daytona 500, since it's not actually happened yet. 

[Sterzo]

The article talks about Liberty Global, not Liberty Media.

 

Global do not own F1.

Indeed. The credibility of the blog must be questioned when its article starts: "Less than 3 years after Liberty Global acquired Formula One." Oh no they didn't.

[AlexPrime]

F1 is slowly improving, but with the same team/combo winning again and again, it will be difficult to get new viewers and fans. While Marquez dominates Moto GP and Turkington the BTCC in a similar way, these series actually seem competitive, with many different winners and close racing. F1 is a different type of animal, but in modern landscape, this is no excuse. If it stops being fun for the majority of fans, it will die. Budget caps and ballast are not very popular, but to me it seems better than long periods of dominance. Since the beginning of the new century, we had three prolonged periods of dominance - of Michael, Sebastian and Lewis. They cover more than ten years out of 19. This is not healthy and must not be allowed to continue.

[Fatgadget]

But remaining entertaining is crucial for the sport's survival. Put simply, if enough people fail to find it entertaining any more, it won't exist very much longer.

 

I'd be against any introduction of reversed grids or success ballast, but equally, seeing Mercedes go on winning for several more years (which is a distinct possibility, while ever these engines are used) has very little appeal to me either. I want to see different teams and drivers winning. I want more than two or three drivers capable of competing for the title.

 

Saying all that, I struggle to think of anything that Liberty has done that has made me shudder with revulsion, or feel that they were changing the sport beyond recognition. I find the "F1 theme" and dramatic grid graphics cheesy and cringe worthy as hell, but it's not a deal-breaker for me.

Depends what your definition of the word  'entertaining' is doesn't it? Well what is it??

[BRG]

You have 15 of 21 races that represent the places with adequate tradition

How many more does f1 need?

Can F1 in these markets alone contribute to increase in viewers?

It is a question of not having LESS, rather than of having more, in the real motorsport countries.

 

And they could get a massive increase in veiwers if they just tore down the paywall.

[RA2]

Why should we have a race in Britain an Germany?

One wants to get rid of gasoline cars soon and the other planted trees on a circuit.

When the Motorsport fans do not have the support of the people elected govt it reflects the real direction of the majority.

[NixxxoN]

Formula One is a sport, not a circus full of entertainment.

 

lol

You got that reversed.

 

Its a business and an engineering competition with lots of unequality.

 

By concept and definition F1 and sport simply can't be the same

Edited by NixxxoN, 28 January 2019 - 18:03.

[pdac]

Depends what your definition of the word  'entertaining' is doesn't it? Well what is it??

 

I would imagine that it's not about being "entertaining" so much as about being "sufficiently entertaining to attract the audience levels that you are seeking". To that end, I would imagine that Liberty want it to be "more entertaining" and that means being whatever it needs to be in order to grow the audience.

 

That needs to be net growth (i.e. if they can lose a chunk of the existing audience as long as the replace them with a bigger number). What also needs to be considered is that, whilst there is an amount of overlap, the TV audience is different to the track-side audience and it will not serve them well to grow one, if the other reduces.

[pdac]

Why should we have a race in Britain an Germany?

One wants to get rid of gasoline cars soon and the other planted trees on a circuit.

When the Motorsport fans do not have the support of the people elected govt it reflects the real direction of the majority.

 

Who are "the Motorsport fans", though. There may be a lot of people who avidly follow F1 who are not the same as you.

[Fatgadget]

lol

You got that reversed.

 

Its a business and an engineering competition with lots of unequality.

 

By concept and definition F1 and sport simply can't be the same

I can't quite follow your argument. There is always inequality in whatever sport. That is why there always winners and losers..or am  I missing something?

[pdac]

It is a question of not having LESS, rather than of having more, in the real motorsport countries.

 

And they could get a massive increase in veiwers if they just tore down the paywall.

 

Ah, but are the after an increase in viewers or an increase in revenue?

[Cynic2]

The article talks about Liberty Global, not Liberty Media.

 

Global do not own F1.

 

 

I have difficulty taking seriously a blog or post which names the wrong company in the first sentence.  Particularly a blog/post which seems to try to cover the US Stock Market.

Equally it's a post which provides information on Liberty Media's confidential strategic and financial directions without even suggesting any sources.  Was this from John Malone?  John Malone's yard man?  John Malone's niece's husband's ex-brother-in-law's neighbor?  Some guy at the corner pub named John Malone?  Who knows?

It's certainly possible that some other company, which knows Liberty Media's strategic plans for Formula One, wishes to buy in.  It's possible that Liberty might sell some of its shares (but less than a controlling interest).  

I doubt we'll ever really know any of this from unsourced rumors on the Internet.

[Maxioos]

I can't quite follow your argument. There is always inequality in whatever sport. That is why there always winners and losers..or am  I missing something?

I struggle with F1 sport/entertainment also. For one, the drivers are top sporters, the teams and drivers are competing in a competition. But in sport the best sporters should always end up competing against each other in highest competition. And that "for sure" promotion isn't available for the top sporters in lower categories and the not best drivers can occupy a seat in the highest competition. I think it's one of the view or only "sports" without natural promotion/degradation build in between competition levels, the lack of that for team or individual sporter urges me for category "sport". (And than for most, lesser drivers occupy seat highest level)

[Fatgadget]

It is a question of not having LESS, rather than of having more, in the real motorsport countries.

 

And they could get a massive increase in veiwers if they just tore down the paywall.

Sod the wannabes hey!

[Fastcake]

Why should we have a race in Britain an Germany?

One wants to get rid of gasoline cars soon and the other planted trees on a circuit.

When the Motorsport fans do not have the support of the people elected govt it reflects the real direction of the majority.

That would be everywhere then, as motorsport remains a relatively small sport even in countries where it is popular.

Edited by Fastcake, 28 January 2019 - 19:09.

[aportinga]

Didn't Bernie once sell for lots and then bought it back for pennies on the dollar?

 

Could this happen yet again?