- 87,729
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
So Im going to miss half the races because I cant justify a sky subscription for just F1.![]()
A friend of mine misses all the races because he can't justify a £145.50 TV Licence just for F1.
So Im going to miss half the races because I cant justify a sky subscription for just F1.![]()
A friend of mine misses all the races because he can't justify a £145.50 TV Licence just for F1.
While that is a fantastic moral standpoint your friend has took, surely in the big scope of things it cant make a difference to the beeb.
I'm not wholly sure it's a moral standpoint - he views television as being largely pap and simply doesn't pay the £12 a month subscription fee when he can watch almost anything anybody else recommends on iPlayer or DVD. This means he doesn't get to watch live F1 very often, except at others' houses, because he can't justify the Licence fee.
Ask him yourself. It's Venari.
phone in to vote, where the decision has already been made and that money is going straight in
to the pockets of Ant & Dec who, despite being Executive Producers, apparently know nothing about all this fraud going on.
Allegedly.
Television is total pap.
The mind boggles on the amount of celebrity/soapstar/wannabe/neverwillbe/come/do/singing/dancing/skiing/skating/knitting/atomsplitting/a/b/c/x/factor/gottalent/gotnotalent/jungle/outhouse* delete as applicable that is on tv, and even more incredible the amount of people that watch it, all its spin offs, and then phone in to vote, where the decision has already been made and that money is going straight in the coffers.
I'm not sure that phone votes make much money. Relative to the production costs of one of those shows.
The results are manipulated though.
I wonder has FOTA had a say in this as surely they will get less viewers and therefore less sponsors.
I wonder has FOTA had a say in this as surely they will get less viewers and therefore less sponsors.
My point is the generic rubbish they serve up, and the way the masses rush to it. Im sure they make enough to keep it going.
The viewing figures will plummet as a lot of countries outside of the UK rely on the BBC's in-house coverage of F1.
Teams will get less sponsorship money once the big sponsors realise that no-one is seeing their adverts, but the deal is obviously that this loss to the teams will be offset by a greater share in the TV revenues generated from Sky, and FOTA clearly signed-off on this deal. Some of the statements being attributed to them about "clarifying points" I think is just them trying to extricate themselves from being called liars over their previous statements such as this from Whitmarsh,
" Its crucial to the commercial model of Formula 1 that TV coverage should remain free-to-air, and therefore universally accessible, and therefore widely consumed and enjoyed by large numbers of viewers and the BBC delivers that in the UK.
and this from Whitmarsh..
Our current contracts require that F1 remain on free-to-air and the teams, through FOTA, are clearly going to safeguard their business interests and the interests of the fans in this regard.
and this from Whitmarsh..
All of the FOTA teams believe in free-to-air television.
I suppose this is all still true in a sense, but it's clearly not the message that these statements were originally intended to convey.
I think this is possibly the best compromise to a bad situation. One thing's for sure is that I'll not be paying for Sky.
Yes it is marginally better than losing it altogether (some perspective, thanks), however it indicates The Beeb's priorities and eases the viewer into losing it altogether in a few seasons. Also, could cutting BBCF1's live team's season in half effect the quality of the coverage? Or lead to a mass exodus of staff to the dark side.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/sporteditors/2011/07/f1_coverage_to_be_shared_betwe.html
BBC's Head of F1's blog on the TV rights announcement
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/sporteditors/2011/07/f1_coverage_to_be_shared_betwe.html
BBC's Head of F1's blog on the TV rights announcement
As one of the comments has said.
Why can't somebody just admit that you've spent far too much on the Olympics and something has to give.
Ask yourself this - do you think 6 million people are going to watch the Olympic torch being carried across Britain for 70 days?
I think you could have found the money from somewhere else.
He is on to something, I wont be watching the olympics either.
Does he mean the BBC or the government?
I also won't be watching the Olympics. No interest at all in it.
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/29072011/66/ecclestone-sky-grow-f1-audience.htmlFor sure there are going to be a lot more people viewing, and a lot more opportunities for people to view, so from that point I'm very happy.