F1 TV coverage threadFormula 1

[chromatic9]

Bernie seems to think that "more people watch Sky", he's been sold some cooked figures if he genuinely believes that.

Yeah, he's said a lot of stuff lately and likes to jump sides, one quote seems to hint at future plans from Sky in 2019 onwards.

Bernie does know the real figures. From 2011.
“Sky is doing an incredible job but if you look at their audience they are nowhere. With their figures it would be almost impossible for teams to find sponsors. That would be suicidal.”

The big thing that worked was football. It went behind a paywall in 1992 and never looked back. Bernie has cited this recently. I think F1 is very different but if a few million keep tuning in for highlights and a few hundred thousand watch live and pay through the nose, it seems to work for them

 

[Liquid]

The big thing that worked was football. It went behind a paywall in 1992 and never looked back.

Arguably to the detriment of the sport and the detriment of any team which isn't in the rich boys' playground. The same happens in F1; the small teams, who aren't legacy teams like Ferrari, falter.

 

[TenEightyOne]

The big thing that worked was football. It went behind a paywall in 1992 and never looked back. Bernie has cited this recently. I think F1 is very different...

Arguably, maybe cynically, there could be an important parallel; the BSB/Sky dealings had "men on the inside" - people in the sport in positions of power who stood to make a lot of money from being part of the output control. Alan Sugar was one such character (his book's fascinating).

 

[rono_thomas]

Read and learn , read and learn.

 

[ukfan758]

Read and learn , read and learn.

I learned that MSN used The Daily Mail as their quote source...

 

[TenEightyOne]

I learned that MSN used The Daily Mail as their quote source...

Even worse... it's aggregated the story from The Mirror. Blind leading the blind.

There may be some sensible truth in the story but those outlets' names do nothing to inspire confidence.

 

[rono_thomas]

Even worse... it's aggregated the story from The Mirror. Blind leading the blind.

There may be some sensible truth in the story but those outlets' names do nothing to inspire confidence.

Is there anywhere to corroborate figures?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Is there anywhere to corroborate figures?

The figures "feel" like they're probably close. It's the speculation about the outcome that I'm particularly doubting. Leagues have got themselves into the situation where they need the money, Channel 4, the Beeb and ITV don't seem able to match the astronomical figures invested by Sky and BT.

I'd be interested to see how much income Sky and BT recoup from public broadcast licences if the viewing figures are as low as they seem.

 

[chromatic9]

The figures are true enough. Whether it's BT or Sky you can expect around 300-700k and the odd 1 million. You can see some of these on barb.uk and these type of figures are often reported in articles each year sourced from barb by newspapers. It's the same old same old.

With the Uefa champions league. The 2015 final was only watched by 500k on Sky and 3.5 million on ITV. Sky had also seen a 36% drop in 5 seasons before any BT deal so general interest to watch champions league football is dropping, some of it is down to English teams not doing well but it's also seen to be stagnating around Europe as well.

Regarding the UEFA article, I can see CL football coming back to terrestrial TV. It's more like bonus football for a lot of people in Europe, not something to pay for, even though it's a prestigious competition. The highlights package won't be viewed by a lot unlike F1 highlights at the moment or for the last 25 years English Premier league highlights which generate millions.

That's how I'm sure these deals can keep going, some pay up and the majority will watch the highlights, sponsors are still happy. An English league game could generate 5-10 million views on normal TV but they've been happy with sub 1 million Sky viewers for 25 years.

F1 is the main event so if people carry on tuning in for highlights in the millions then it shall remain until further issues are felt. The acid test is when no races are shown live, do people feel engaged with just highlights.

UEFA CL is a side tournament to the main leagues and going pay only could be detrimental. Also some in Europe want a super league to stop it being second fiddle. This idea has been kicking around for years but recently mainland Europe has been startled by the TV deal the English League has. If you add the Spanish League, the German League and the Uefa Champions league TV deals together, the English League still beats it. The goal is to make a euro super league before certain countries make a mockery.

 

[Samus]

Formula 1 hits decade low audience in UK

https://f1broadcasting.co/2016/04/18/formula-1-hits-decade-low-audience/

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I'm hearing talk that FOM are experimenting with aerial camera drones and could introduce them as early as the Italian Grand Prix. However, the FIA apparently have reservations about it - they're concerned about drones failing and crashing down onto the circuit.

 

[Robin]

Could they just not fly them on the sides of the circuit? They don't have to be directly over the track at any time.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Could they just not fly them on the sides of the circuit? They don't have to be directly over the track at any time.

I imagine that that's how it's going to play out initially until such time as the FIA are convinced that they can be operated safety. It sounds like FOM see a lot of potential for it and want to roll it out as soon as possible.

 

[Samus]

People were talking about drones a few races ago and I'm pretty sure the answer was that they weren't strong enough to hold a camera able to get as good shots as the classic heli-shot can. I mean by all means try them out but footage surely isn't going to look great.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

People were talking about drones a few races ago and I'm pretty sure the answer was that they weren't strong enough to hold a camera able to get as good shots as the classic heli-shot can. I mean by all means try them out but footage surely isn't going to look great.

The WRC has no problem with it whatsoever.

 

[chromatic9]

Viewing figures for the Spanish GP (live on C4) were back up to peaking at 3.6 million from the lows of China (not shown live on C4) and Sky still sat at an average of 560k with C4 averaging around 2.7 million. While 3.6m after China is decent, its still the lowest for a Spanish GP since 2006.

Some good news for Holland is over 1 million tuned in to watch Max win. According to the article it's only shown on pay TV so that is impressive. Seems normal figures are around 500k.
https://f1broadcasting.co/2016/05/

 

[Dennisch]

pay TV

It's a free to air channel, but only if you have to right provider.

And to follow on that news, now that Max is doing good for himself, and the Netherlands, the public channel wants the rights for Formula One.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Heineken have confirmed a multi-year title sponsorship deal for you championship:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/124710/analysis-what-will-heineken-bring-to-f1

I have included it here because embracing and developing digital platforms and social media strategy is a key part of their interest in Formula One.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Heineken...embracing and developing digital platforms and social media strategy is a key part of their interest in Formula One.

If only Bernie felt the same

 

[prisonermonkeys]

If only Bernie felt the same

He does. He's gone on the record as saying that the Heineken deal is going to open up the world of social media. Heineken have apparently been looking to get into Formula One for nearly three years now, so my guess is that the ability to take over management of digital platforms and social media was a big part of that. Formula One has always been slow to adopt new technologies, but it always commits once they're proven to have a long-term future. Look at how long it took to get HD broadcasts.

 

[ukfan758]

Look at how long it took to get HD broadcasts.

What was the true reason behind it taking so long to get HD broadcasts anyway? All of the US networks were broadcasting in HD by 2006 and the sports channel, ESPN, began HD transmission in 2001.

Surely being the most watched motorsport series wouldn't have the excuse of being slow to adapt new technology compared to their American counterparts with far lower viewership of TV shows and sports programs.

 

[Liquid]

Was Heineken one of the sponsors at the Canadian GP just now? At one point I noticed a sign with a green bottle and a red line through it with the caption "If You Drink, Don't Drive"

Which is noble enough but surely the Heineken marketeers must have been saying that from a "psychological" point of view it is bad in the customer's mind to see the Heineken bottle behind a prohibitive red circle.

Not that I have any particular issue with Heineken sponsoring the F1 but it does seem a bit... counter-intuitive? To see the sponsor product with "Hey, we sponsor this driving exhibition. But don't drive if you're using our drink."

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Was Heineken one of the sponsors at the Canadian GP just now?

Yeah, they just signed a major multi-year sponsorship deal. They will be the title sponsor of several races each year.

At one point I noticed a sign with a green bottle and a red line through it with the caption "If You Drink, Don't Drive"

I didn't see it, but then I can't see red and green properly.

Not that I have any particular issue with Heineken sponsoring the F1 but it does seem a bit... counter-intuitive? To see the sponsor product with "Hey, we sponsor this driving exhibition. But don't drive if you're using our drink."

Just about every alcohol brand runs a responsible drinking campaign.

 

[Liquid]

Just about every alcohol brand runs a responsible drinking campaign.

They do but having a prohibitive red circle seems like an advert that would backfire rather than a responsible drinking advert; a Heineken behind a prohibitive red circle with a line through it, to me, spells "Don't Drink Heineken" rather than "Be sensible". Just a small something I noticed.

Like I said, I've no problem with the deal if Heineken are willing to invest. It's great for the sport.

And a drink responsibly campaign goes without saying. When Labatt's sponsored some of the BTCC Sierras they had Don't Drink And Drive running along the sides of the cars. I just find it a little amusing when an alcohol brand is sponsoring motorsports like that due to situational irony.

 

[mustafur]

I think they are doing it to combat Future EU advertising plans to ban Alcohol advertising.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

They do but having a prohibitive red circle seems like an advert that would backfire rather than a responsible drinking advert; a Heineken behind a prohibitive red circle with a line through it, to me, spells "Don't Drink Heineken" rather than "Be sensible". Just a small something I noticed.

I guess I'll just have to take your word for it.

 

[PzR Slim]

Just read that Sky are going to be broadcasting every race from the 2017 season in 4K. Bring it!

 

[MCFerocious]

What young Bernie doesn't seem to get is that now there are good alternatives to F1 which are also intriguing sports. Examples are Formula E and the BTCC. F1 is nice but it's not the end of the world if it were to shut up shop tomorrow. I have watched from the age of 13 and I have loved F1 but I have gone off it slightly now. It really should stay on free to air TV. That it is is going away from this model makes me want to dislike F1 and how it is run; chasing the money only. It should look to its history and its heritage and stay free to air.

Also, does anyone also feel slightly annoyed at the fact that an 18 year old kid can just come and drive an F1 car? F1 cars should be hard to drive and hard to set up. It is slightly annoying that an 18 year old can come and drive one so easily. It wasn't like that in the early 80s.

 

[Bo]

Also, does anyone also feel slightly annoyed at the fact that an 18 year old kid can just come and drive an F1 car? F1 cars should be hard to drive and hard to set up. It is slightly annoying that an 18 year old can come and drive one so easily. It wasn't like that in the early 80s.

Not really, no - I was highly skeptical of Max when he first turned up, but apart from some slight mishaps he seems like a great talent. I think it shows the quality of driver training and preparation in modern motorsport more than anything.

What young Bernie doesn't seem to get is that now there are good alternatives to F1 which are also intriguing sports.

I'm sure even if they did "get it" it wouldn't matter. F1 is a huge cash-cow. Motorsport enthusiasts will know there are other things to watch if you want some wheel-to-wheel racing, but your average Joe will watch whatever the big media outlets cover. F1 has the money, the glamour and the media coverage. That's all it needs to survive as a series.

I dislike everything F1 stands for with a passion, but it hasn't completely lost its way. I would love for the series to carry on embracing modern technology, and I'd love for it to stand out from the crowd in a good way - much like Formula E does - and I think it could be on the cards. It's a rough transition period for all series at the minute, but I'm excited to see what F1 will have on offer 10 years from now. If they make the right moves, I think it could be fascinating.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Just read that Sky are going to be broadcasting every race from the 2017 season in 4K. Bring it!

And here I am still watching F1 in SD.