F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.

Who should F1 be designed for?

Poll ended at 19 Nov 2015, 11:17

The serious enthusiasts as per this forum who watch everything
18
33%
The general fans who watch 85% of races
26
47%
The fan who watches 50% of the races
6
11%
The casual fan who may just turn on the race 2-3 times a year
5
9%
 
Total votes: 55

KeiKo403
KeiKo403
7
Joined: 18 Feb 2011, 00:16

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

I'm not sure F1 (ie FOM) put any fans first.
The teams and some drivers do put fans first with photo oppertunities, PR events and signings etc.
However for F1 (FOM) to truely put fans first we need to see reduced ticket prices and a return to free to air TV.

For F1 (FIA) to make race ticket prices/pay TV prices to be more worthwhile we need better racing. Now as good as Qualifying is, all it does is put the race cars and drivers in order of fastest to slowest. So generally the faster cars will always start in front of the slower cars. FIA need to do some analysis and make Qualifying better. Like lets keep Q1 and Q2 as it is. Put up a WCC (not WDC) point or 2 for setting the fastest Q3 lap but ultimately the 10 drivers which made it into Q3 start the race in reverse order of their finishing places from the last race.

Thats how to make overtaking happen up the front. Thats how to bring the midfield into play. Bringing midfield into play brings more sponsership oppertunities (£$£$£$£$£) to midfield teams.

However, that extra money would just be spent lining Bernie's pockets, so...F1 shouldn't try and do anything for the fans. It should just be itself and if people like it they will become fans, if they don't, nevermind.

Anyway - sorry for that ending up off topic but I hope you see how it led to it.

ChrisF1
ChrisF1
7
Joined: 28 Feb 2013, 21:48

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

KeiKo403 wrote:I'm not sure F1 (ie FOM) put any fans first.
Completely agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with this point - they do in their creation of rules.

"We need to make the cars look more aggressive" and then promote ugly wing ideas that look like video game concept cars with stupid angles and v shaped elements.

The F1 fan surveys that are done every year are only completed by the hardcore fans, and every time the results come back the response is "The fans are wrong" and they continue to chase this false fanbase that aren't going to be investing their money into team merch or race tickets.

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
551
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

F1 should put casual fans first.

Look what happened to WRC!

Does that even still exist?!

I was a casual fan and I was to watch it all the time back when speedvision aired it. Even bought and played rally games just because of that same casual viewing.
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

I was a casual fan and I was to watch it all the time
I don't know but that doesn't so all that "casual"
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
551
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

strad wrote:
I was a casual fan and I was to watch it all the time
I don't know but that doesn't so all that "casual"
60% of the time all the time! 8)
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
591
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

CHT wrote: Bernie is not the sole beneficiary, the sponsors does benefits too, especially the investment banks and the big fortune 500 companies who uses F1 weekend to entertain their clients with VIP access and lounge etc.
None of those parties are fans. And in "poor" countries none of them are the local population either.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

wesley123
wesley123
204
Joined: 23 Feb 2008, 17:55

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:An example of where F1 has gone wrong:
"It's incredible. All these countries in a little bit of financial problems are getting the job done," said Ecclestone.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/34673408
Bernie is happy to take money from countries that should be spending it on their own people. Instead they spend it on vanity projects like a Formula 1 race. The only beneficiaries are Bernie and his rich mates.

As a fan of F1 it's great to think the sport will revisit historic race countries like Argentina. But the knowledge that the money would be better spent in a country with financial problems brings a sour taste.
Why would that mean they have gone wrong? Why should Bernie be held responsible for something countries do to themselves?
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

CHT
CHT
-6
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 05:24

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
CHT wrote: Bernie is not the sole beneficiary, the sponsors does benefits too, especially the investment banks and the big fortune 500 companies who uses F1 weekend to entertain their clients with VIP access and lounge etc.
None of those parties are fans. And in "poor" countries none of them are the local population either.
corporate sponsors are people who keep F1 teams afloat and that's where race organizers make most of their money too. The reality is that motorsports is an extremely expensive sports and only the wealthy can afford to get into this kind of sports event, even its for leisure.

And the sad truth in life is that people always like to associate themselves with celebrities, the glam and the rich and that is one of the pulling factor of the sports. When Cristiano Ronaldo disguise himself as a homeless in Madrid, not many people really pay attention to his skills with the ball, its only when he reveal himself then people on the street start noticing him.

Even if you host a race in poor country like India, how many poor people in India can actually afford to attend a race? And how many parents will really encourage their children to take up a sports which they know they cannot afford it?

ScottB
ScottB
4
Joined: 17 Mar 2012, 14:45

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

F1 has to have a growing fan base. That means a core of 'die hards' plus the 'casuals.' The ultimate goal being that the casuals slowly become die hards.

I don't think the sport itself is 'dumbing down' indeed with things like DRS, KERS, ERS, MGU-H and all the other acronyms in use, I'd say that was, if anything, becoming a barrier to the causal viewer to understand what's going on.


To me, the very real problem that the F1 fanbase has is the steady move to pay tv. Sure, in the UK there are still 9 or 10 races a year on free tv, but that's probably only an interim before we go full pay, as other countries have done. The issue is that various sports look to the vast riches football, and the English Premiership in particular, generate. But it's not that simple, in just England alone the biggest clubs can pull in crowds comparable to some Grand Prix, and millions more would likely see themselves as 'die hard' fans; attending games, paying for tv, buying strips and so on. Invariably these people then bring in their children and so on, keeping the cycle going.

F1 lacks both the size of this hardcore fanbase, and the ease of access. It's markedly harder to go to a Grand Prix, than to attend a football match. As the sport moves to pay TV, it becomes increasingly unlikely that new casual fans get drawn in. Races are moving away from well attended, die hard fan favourites to questionable venues in questionable countries, costs to attend get ever higher, and so on.


So really, the model F1 is moving into, is one almost focused solely on the die hards. This may be fattening Bernie's wallet still further for now, and I doubt he has much concern for what'll happen in 5-10 years time if the fan base starts shrinking as a consequence.

User avatar
Phil
66
Joined: 25 Sep 2012, 16:22

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:Bernie is happy to take money from countries that should be spending it on their own people. Instead they spend it on vanity projects like a Formula 1 race. The only beneficiaries are Bernie and his rich mates.

As a fan of F1 it's great to think the sport will revisit historic race countries like Argentina. But the knowledge that the money would be better spent in a country with financial problems brings a sour taste.
IMO it's not Bernie who is taking the money - it's ultimately those states that are giving Bernie the money. And it doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing mind you. If we take Singapore for example; it's a great example of a city that has re-invented itself over the past 20 years. And the publicity it gained by staging a F1 race has probably helped to propel and communicate that image to the rest of the world quite successfully of which that state then profits from an increase of tourism etc.

This is perhaps also an incentive for many arabic states or other venues of poorer countries; By staging a F1 race, they are promoting their country through a global event watched and followed by millions. Yes, the grand stands might be rather empty (which is upsetting for genuine F1 fans), but the benefit is not limited to the people partaking in such an event, it's also by the promotion through television and news media. How much this results in tourism is hard to gauge, but it's why these countries have an interest in holding (and subsequently paying Bernie a lot of money) a F1 race in the first place: PR, viewership, promotion etc.

The same could be said over who holds other grand events like the Olympic games, the FIFA world cup etc.

Sadly, the countries who fail to capitalize on using such an event to promote their country or city will be left behind. I've been to both the 2010 Australian GP in Melbourne, and the 2011 GP in Spa. They are night and day. Melbourne really makes it a big event - lots of attractions, lots of things to do - the entire weekend is just one entire big party attracting thousands (if not hundreds of thousand) of people, not just those who go to the actual event. Spa, is well - like going to an outdoor kart event. It's in the middle of no-where (relatively speaking) and the experience is as raw as it can get (weather included) and its sure only to attract the most hardcore motorsport fans. While it would be a pitty to lose Spa as it is surely one of the most epic race tracks - it is a venue that is struggling to keep up paying to stage the event and if you look closely at what they are doing to promote it (that being zilch), you can see easily see why. Arguably, the same holds true for Hockenheim/Nürburgring and many other struggling race tracks. It's just the way it is sadly.

If these events want to stick on the calendar, they need to do something. Either simply pay up to stage and host an expensive event without reward as they have been doing, or they need to find ways to promote the event either to attract more people to the event itself and/or to further promote the event and the country/city by raising awareness through television etc. Those that do this will profit in the long run, those that won't, well.. either they suck it up as they have been, or they will most likely disappear eventually.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II
#Team44 supporter

mrluke
mrluke
33
Joined: 22 Nov 2013, 20:31

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

Bernie is bleeding the venues dry, they need to make a profit to be able to reinvest and improve their facilities, if the fees were at a reasonable level then ticket prices could come down and facilities would improve.

User avatar
Phil
66
Joined: 25 Sep 2012, 16:22

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

My point is rather that staging a F1 event is something that needs to be looked as something broader than just the local event. Staging a F1 race represents a big opportunity for those involved to use the sport as a platform to promote. The local event might be a loss in itself, but the impact it has through sheer publicity might make it a worthwhile expenditure in the long run - that is, if you are prepared to use this to your advantage and make something out of it. Melbourne has done this, so has Singapore. Most struggling venues have not.

The price of staging a F1 is a simple matter of supply and demand. As long as there are countries out there that are willing to pay ludicrous amount of money to stage such an event, Bernie and the sport will gladly take it (which one way or another will flow to teams eventually). Sadly, the struggling venues will continue to struggle as a result of this, but it's IMO a failure on the level of the country in question or the state to see the event for what it is, or what it could be.

I just see this as one of the examples on where there is some contradiction; We have epic venues like Spa that have been on the calendar for ever, but in the middle of nowhere and are struggling to stay on the calendar because it's inherently hard to promote beyond the most hardcore motorsport fanatics, and then you have venues that feature empty grandstands by rich countries that use it merely as a long-term investment to promote the image of their country. If the sport should stay close to its roots, you are losing out on millions made by these countries and the matter of fact is; the venues that are struggling will still struggle, or we embrace the prospect of promoting the sport to larger audiences across the world to which most countries use it as a publicity exercise.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II
#Team44 supporter

sgth0mas
sgth0mas
3
Joined: 18 Mar 2015, 03:42

Re: F1 should not put casual fans first.

Post

On the subject of fees and venues...its amazing that a $28MM tax subsidy isnt enough to make a race with over 100,000 attendees profitable. And when the funding is cut to $19.5MM, organizers claim they cant afford to host the race.

COTA puts on a lot of side events to try and make the weekend a festival, but its started to fall flat. And paying big name music acts isnt cheap either. Both of those are directed at casual fans obviously...and when you have race fees in excess of $30MM, you cant afford to execute many of the side shows for casual fans properly.