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.
If Murdoch does succeed in taking over, you can bet your bottom dollar Ferrari and Mercedes will want out.
Global players will want big audiences, Murdoch does not give them that. There is a whole can of worms yet to be opened should we reach this bridge(one hopes not).
Petra ecclestone has just bought the most expensive house in the us
Reported at 150million US. Bernie is worth 1.5 billion. How much money
does this greedy pig need he has been raping the sport for years and now
this
Iam so disgusted I can't put it into words. I can afford to pay for sky
but refuse to do so and think I will turn off next year.
Just read that article and it makes perfect sense Iam a die hard
f1 fan and refuse to pay casual fans will just stop watching
How can the teams be so short sighted the oem's will be the first
to pull the plug when the ratings fall and the small cant afford to lose
sponsors and will find it hard to attract new ones now
I've been quickly trying to calculate how much coverage the BBC has of the overall global viewership as a percentage. The annual figure for 2010 total viewers was 527 million. I can't find an annual figure for the BBC so I'm try it on a race to race basis with a gestimate that the BBC pulls 5 millions viewers a race (too high?).
Some quick maths gives that as about 18% of the global average, so the Sky deal will see this half apparently and sponsors are set to lose between 5 and 10% of their total audience. Enough to shake them? I'm not sure.
"Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words." - Chuang Tzu
I've been quickly trying to calculate how much coverage the BBC has of the overall global viewership as a percentage. The annual figure for 2010 total viewers was 527 million. I can't find an annual figure for the BBC so I'm try it on a race to race basis with a gestimate that the BBC pulls 5 millions viewers a race (too high?).
It could be even higher than just those that watch in the UK. I've repeatedly heard the BBC commentators welcome foreign viewers to their broadcast, anyone have any idea about how many countries actually use the BBC show?
Well, so far I've complained through the BBC complaints procedure and received a fairly standard "we think this is great" response.
Next I think the BBC Trust and my MP to show how I think the BBC has failed in the duties set out in its "fair trade" policy.
I think an open letter to the teams and their principal sponsors would be useful too. Let them know that they've probably backed the wrong horse by taking Bernie's extra $1m to shut up about the deal.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
In Autosport.com today, Adam Parr (Williams chairman) says you F1 fans in GB must bite the bullet. It's not a cheap show to put on, you know. And, he claims, "we have to balance the book, which let's face it, not many teams in Formula 1 are doing." So, by some sort of boardroom reasoning, fans have been freeloaders, getting all this wonderful entertainment at no cost. Now, the poor little F1 teams are striking back. It's time to pay up before these poor downtrodden teams go under. [/end heavy melodramatic tone]
I do love this quote: "If you go to Cirque de Soleil and you see cutting edge performers in an amazing facility, and constantly updating the show, it costs you £100 for a good ticket, or you can go to your local circus with a couple of mangy elephants and a rather droopy clown and it costs you £10. People are capable of distinguishing." Yes, we can distinguish. "A couple of mangy elephants"? That's HRT and Virgin. "a rather droopy clown"? Bernie, of course.
Oh yes, the bottom line: F1 fans are supposed to support cost reductions in F1. "I'd like the fans . . . to be a bit more supportive of some of the things we are trying to do to reduce the cost in the sport." I have to ask how? By paying more? He is not really talking about cost reductions -- we can do nothing about that. He is simply demanding we help CVC make more money. The teams have agreed to restrict spending. Why do they need a huge new infusion of cash? I can not stand NASCAR, but IndyCar racing isn't half bad.
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill
JaF - Have you written to Sky? I'm intrigued to find out how they justify their comment "this is fantastic news for F1 fans". That really was taking the piss.
donskar - That line from Parr is silly. Teams splashing so much money in such an obscene way have a heck of a lot of cheek to plead poverty. We all have to make ends meet on ever reducing disposable income due to inflation & frozen pay. Have they reduced driver salaries? Do they need those huge hospitality units? That £1m from Sky is a paltry 1% of their budget.
So what is Parr going to do to help me balance my budget since I have to help him balance his? Could he advise me if it is better to curtail my family holiday from 2 weeks to 10 days, or does he think I should turn the heating off this winter?
To be honest F1 would be just as spectacular on 10% smaller budgets, but piss taking teams would have to have to reduce their champagne lifestyle and ditch the free loaders.
Anyway, it's a free market and I'm out.
PS - It would be good if a team or circuit went bust, might help the others wake up to the reality of what Max was trying to tell them. Imagine a shrinking calendar? They have to go to circuits with fans instead of empty grandstands, that would be refreshing!
Last edited by Richard on 03 Aug 2011, 15:22, edited 1 time in total.
The viewing figures will be alot lower for sky maybe 2 million per
race in the country the sport is mostly based that can't be good
and as for the country's taken the BBC feed now how many are going
to want ten races, interest for F1 will fall and sponsors looking to cut
costs will want out
I think Bernie has told the teams to say this is great for F1 or no tv money for you
Anyone with his background in F1 ought to know better than asking the man a question related to money. Look at his team Williams, haven't a hope of scoring podiums, or in fact adding to any "entertainment" value of the sport, and he warrants us coughing up more cash? I swear if I ever got within 30 feet of the man I would divulge a tad more than what was just on my mind.
What exactly has this man even added to Williams let alone F1? I see Sam Micheal will not even answer questions about the man. That's an F1 "dude" who got spiked in the back by a banker....
Seriously, mr parr should entertain some of us around his no doubt luxurious accommodations so that he can get a little taste of the pulse out there. Imbecilic moron!
@richard_leeds: good post. Intuitively, it would seem that total viewership will go down. FOM/CVC will not admit a reduced TV audience if it does go down, so it will be hard to confirm. Any sharp CMO (Chief Marketing Officer) will be able to get viewership figures and will set his F1 budget accordingly. We will see. This pay-for-view initiative represents an interesting roll of the dice.
@ JET: I didn't want to zap Williams, but you are right: they offer very little entertainment, spectacle, or interest.
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill
