F1 TV coverage threadFormula 1
- Thread starter DwightSchrute12
- 1,296 comments
- 131,344 views
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,312
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
It's bad news, but some of you may be relieved knowing that Vettel will dominate from 2012-18.
dhandeh
Premium
- 11,390
- England
- dhandes
I quit with F1.
- 136
- DoomtrainUK
I love F1 and can't see myself missing my favourite sport over this, il probably subscribe next year and at the end of 2012 consider if it's worth it, as for the presenters I was quite sceptical about Humphrey DC and EJ when they started but I've grown to like them alot, very easy going and funny, my worry is that sky's presenters will be the kind of intolerable personality-less zombies you usually find on the sky football shows, also there's the worry for British driver fans, button and Hamilton will be de-motivated due to less British viewers
MagpieRacer
Premium
- 17,492
- Wymondham, Norfolk
- Seagull_Racer
I think this sucks, I know how many ad breaks they have, during the IRL, DTM and previously with A1GP.
That said my dad has ties with a top dog from Sky Sports who predicted this to my dad 6 months ago and also said he has seen what it will consist of, selectable team radio, caemra angles, on board cameras and such like.
That said my dad has ties with a top dog from Sky Sports who predicted this to my dad 6 months ago and also said he has seen what it will consist of, selectable team radio, caemra angles, on board cameras and such like.
- 12,513
- Ireland
- The__Luke
I think my parents are getting freeview soon anyways, they better.
The only two things Sky has ever brought to the world that are actually good is the TV show 'A League of their Own" and the Food channel which has the 'Man v Food' show.
I won't be too bothered about missing a show where I get hungry anyways.
Hope freeview have Sky Sports....
The only two things Sky has ever brought to the world that are actually good is the TV show 'A League of their Own" and the Food channel which has the 'Man v Food' show.
I won't be too bothered about missing a show where I get hungry anyways.
Hope freeview have Sky Sports....
MagpieRacer
Premium
- 17,492
- Wymondham, Norfolk
- Seagull_Racer
Virgin HD does, its apparently quite cheap too.
I lucked out cos my parents decided on multi room Sky HD, full package so Im sorted. Just the adverts I dont want :/
Oh and Tony Jardine and the annoying commentators Sky Sports will inevitably give us.
I lucked out cos my parents decided on multi room Sky HD, full package so Im sorted. Just the adverts I dont want :/
Oh and Tony Jardine and the annoying commentators Sky Sports will inevitably give us.
dhandeh
Premium
- 11,390
- England
- dhandes
I think my parents are getting freeview soon anyways, they better.
The only two things Sky has ever brought to the world that are actually good is the TV show 'A League of their Own" and the Food channel which has the 'Man v Food' show.
I won't be too bothered about missing a show where I get hungry anyways.
Hope freeview have Sky Sports....
Man v food, now that is worth the subscription, go adam go, eat that food, one more bite!!!
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
I can't believe Bernies has taken such a short termist solution.
The UK is a key audience for F1. I believe 8/12 teams are based in the UK, the UK has some of the largest TV viewing figures per head. A large proportion of the engineers going into the sport are from the UK because the sport has huge popularity in the UK.
There is a reason for this, F1 has been on free-to-view TV (If you discount the License fee which is more of an overhead) since... ever. You take that away not only will TV audiences plummet but interest will decline. In the long term this will hit F1's UK popularity hard. They won't notice next year, or the year after. But sometime around 2015/2016 they will notice viewing figures have fallen dramatically and as a result, so will sponsorship figures. Infact due to the recent recession sponsorship will probably rise next year, but in a few years it will have fallen in real terms. I thought F1 was trying to grow it's audience and expand it's potential for sponsorship revenue? They've done the exact opposite.
Maybe Bernie knows he'll probably be dead by 2018 (by the law of probability and average age) so he doesn't care either way*.
*Apologies if that last line is upsetting for anyone, I do not wish death upon him. Just considerable, unbearable pain.
The UK is a key audience for F1. I believe 8/12 teams are based in the UK, the UK has some of the largest TV viewing figures per head. A large proportion of the engineers going into the sport are from the UK because the sport has huge popularity in the UK.
There is a reason for this, F1 has been on free-to-view TV (If you discount the License fee which is more of an overhead) since... ever. You take that away not only will TV audiences plummet but interest will decline. In the long term this will hit F1's UK popularity hard. They won't notice next year, or the year after. But sometime around 2015/2016 they will notice viewing figures have fallen dramatically and as a result, so will sponsorship figures. Infact due to the recent recession sponsorship will probably rise next year, but in a few years it will have fallen in real terms. I thought F1 was trying to grow it's audience and expand it's potential for sponsorship revenue? They've done the exact opposite.
Maybe Bernie knows he'll probably be dead by 2018 (by the law of probability and average age) so he doesn't care either way*.
*Apologies if that last line is upsetting for anyone, I do not wish death upon him. Just considerable, unbearable pain.
- 8,642
- London
- GTP_Stotty
Late to the party on this one as I've been out on business all day!
Personally, I'm not really fussed one way or the other. I already have SKY HD+ donwstairs and SKY+ in the bedroom, so if anything it just makes my package better value.
The only donwside was the potential for in race adverts, but as SKY have confirmed they won't be running ads during the race or qualifying that's not an issue.
Given the quality of coverage they provide for the current sports they have I'm really looking forward to seeing what the program is like... wonder who they'll get as a front man.
Personally, I'm not really fussed one way or the other. I already have SKY HD+ donwstairs and SKY+ in the bedroom, so if anything it just makes my package better value.
The only donwside was the potential for in race adverts, but as SKY have confirmed they won't be running ads during the race or qualifying that's not an issue.
Given the quality of coverage they provide for the current sports they have I'm really looking forward to seeing what the program is like... wonder who they'll get as a front man.
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
Just read this: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93491
The BBC coverage was not all about the races, it was about the practice sessions and qualifying aswell. I've tried listening to Practice on radio, it's not as good as having the picture aswell. Qualifying is very important and without the built up to the end of Q3 a lot of the excitement has gone.
Bernie said there is a chance that full races may be deferred on the BBC leading to less people paying for the SKy subscription. A few quid from Sky is going to say goodbye to that idea, he only said it to worry Sky and make them part with more cash.
He also highlights that Sky has coverage of approximately 10 million homes. But how many of those have the Sports package? Then, how many of those are the F1 fanbase that the sport relies on? You're talking 1 million if that.
The BBC coverage was not all about the races, it was about the practice sessions and qualifying aswell. I've tried listening to Practice on radio, it's not as good as having the picture aswell. Qualifying is very important and without the built up to the end of Q3 a lot of the excitement has gone.
Bernie said there is a chance that full races may be deferred on the BBC leading to less people paying for the SKy subscription. A few quid from Sky is going to say goodbye to that idea, he only said it to worry Sky and make them part with more cash.
He also highlights that Sky has coverage of approximately 10 million homes. But how many of those have the Sports package? Then, how many of those are the F1 fanbase that the sport relies on? You're talking 1 million if that.
- 865
So what if 10 million homes have Sky sports, they still watch F1 on the BBC... He doesn't know what he's saying and has no valid points. I wonder how much have Sky paid him.
There's also this now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/content/response/formulaonerights2012
- 8,642
- London
- GTP_Stotty
Having had a bit of time to look back through the thread I thought I'd pull out the following quote from Famine as it completely reflects my experience of SKY...
I am... their coverage of other sports is excellent.
I guess you're one of the first to say that you're looking forward to this!
I am... their coverage of other sports is excellent.
- 8,642
- London
- GTP_Stotty
Eh?
SKY news presenters maybe, but for all the actual sports coverage SKY employ proper presenters, with personal experience of the sport.
The football coverage has a whole host of ex Premier League players and managers and the cricket coverage is like a who's who of ex test stars from the major test sides etc etc.
They will no doubt employ a host of ex F1 people to host the program.
- 626
- Sussex
- DrTrouserPlank
I'll be interested to see who of the BBC team tomorrow has got the guts to say what they really think of this deal, and who is fishing for a contract with Sky and keeping their mouth shut.
Of course I suspect the brief will be to mention as little as possible about it, and certainly not to find Whitmarsh and ask him why as a representative of FOTA he has been such a bare-faced liar when it comes to the apparently sudden turnaround in their stance towards paid-for TV.
Of course I suspect the brief will be to mention as little as possible about it, and certainly not to find Whitmarsh and ask him why as a representative of FOTA he has been such a bare-faced liar when it comes to the apparently sudden turnaround in their stance towards paid-for TV.
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
^I think chances are high that Brundle and Coulthard will remain as commentators for Sky. Sky would be insane to pass up on Brundle now he has become such an icon for F1 coverage in the UK.
Jake Humphrey is a BBC man and will move on to the Olympics. Ted Kravitz effectively becomes available though, he could end up going back to ITV to do BTCC or Sky might pick him up.
Not sure on Lee McKenzie - I think she is a BBC person too.
As for Eddie Jordan...well we shall see, Eddie really only works bouncing off Coulthard and Jake. Although lately Jake has become pretty much a bully on EJ which isn't nice to see, he almost appears to have no respect for any of EJ's opinions anymore - which ok I can see why but its not nice and sometimes EJ does have valid points or relevant opinions, he's not always a bumbling fool.
After having a day to think it over, I still remain adamant that I'm not going to subscribe to Sky just for F1, there are no other (especially Sports channels) programmes or events I particularly wish to see. Although Indycars would be nice.
To those pointing out the TV license fee - this is an irrelevant point, because it is a mandatory fee to watch any TV. I of course already pay the license to watch many other programmes, so its not something which directly affects this particular argument. Its just now I have to pay more to view F1 with the downside of paying for a large amount of other channels which I have little to no interest in viewing.
I'm perfectly happy to pay the license fee because I watch a lot of various things that crop up on various channels. I'm happy to pay for what I feel I will watch. That F1 is a part of that is/was a bonus.
I'm not happy to pay for Sky and in particular Sky Sports because I don't feel I will watch much of the other programming at all and I don't feel that future programming will be much better. Its nothing to do with the quality of Sky and more to do with what I feel is value for my money. To pay for this just to view F1 is too much for me.
If Sky Sports suddenly picked up a fair bit more of motorsports, I might re-consider. But this is very unlikely when they are going to pay big fees to Bernie. I doubt they will spend more money on lesser motorsports because none of them will get anywhere near the same kind of viewing audience, especially not sports cars/endurance racing.
I hope one day F1 returns to "free-to-air" TV, if not for me but for also the casual fans who will miss out. The biggest thing I think I will miss is being able to chat to the odd person who just happened to flick the F1 on during the weekend even though they don't really follow it. In other words, I think I will have less people to talk to about F1.
Er, well straight away all the BBC people (Humphrey mostly) won't say anything stupid. But generally, (as with most BBC stuff) they are mostly quite frank about stuff like this. I'm very sure Brundle, EJ and Coulthard will happily air their view though they will almost certainly tread carefully with their words.
Jake Humphrey is a BBC man and will move on to the Olympics. Ted Kravitz effectively becomes available though, he could end up going back to ITV to do BTCC or Sky might pick him up.
Not sure on Lee McKenzie - I think she is a BBC person too.
As for Eddie Jordan...well we shall see, Eddie really only works bouncing off Coulthard and Jake. Although lately Jake has become pretty much a bully on EJ which isn't nice to see, he almost appears to have no respect for any of EJ's opinions anymore - which ok I can see why but its not nice and sometimes EJ does have valid points or relevant opinions, he's not always a bumbling fool.
After having a day to think it over, I still remain adamant that I'm not going to subscribe to Sky just for F1, there are no other (especially Sports channels) programmes or events I particularly wish to see. Although Indycars would be nice.
To those pointing out the TV license fee - this is an irrelevant point, because it is a mandatory fee to watch any TV. I of course already pay the license to watch many other programmes, so its not something which directly affects this particular argument. Its just now I have to pay more to view F1 with the downside of paying for a large amount of other channels which I have little to no interest in viewing.
I'm perfectly happy to pay the license fee because I watch a lot of various things that crop up on various channels. I'm happy to pay for what I feel I will watch. That F1 is a part of that is/was a bonus.
I'm not happy to pay for Sky and in particular Sky Sports because I don't feel I will watch much of the other programming at all and I don't feel that future programming will be much better. Its nothing to do with the quality of Sky and more to do with what I feel is value for my money. To pay for this just to view F1 is too much for me.
If Sky Sports suddenly picked up a fair bit more of motorsports, I might re-consider. But this is very unlikely when they are going to pay big fees to Bernie. I doubt they will spend more money on lesser motorsports because none of them will get anywhere near the same kind of viewing audience, especially not sports cars/endurance racing.
I hope one day F1 returns to "free-to-air" TV, if not for me but for also the casual fans who will miss out. The biggest thing I think I will miss is being able to chat to the odd person who just happened to flick the F1 on during the weekend even though they don't really follow it. In other words, I think I will have less people to talk to about F1.
Er, well straight away all the BBC people (Humphrey mostly) won't say anything stupid. But generally, (as with most BBC stuff) they are mostly quite frank about stuff like this. I'm very sure Brundle, EJ and Coulthard will happily air their view though they will almost certainly tread carefully with their words.
- 5,603
- England, Warwickshire
- GTP_Sigma
To me, it really depends on exactly what the 'extend highlights' are, and what quality of commentary and production the BBC puts in. I guess I could accept missing half the qualifying sessions.
I won't be getting sky for F1, it's not worth it, maybe if it came through virgin media, I could justify it with the fast broadband options they have.
I won't be getting sky for F1, it's not worth it, maybe if it came through virgin media, I could justify it with the fast broadband options they have.
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Sky Sports is additional fee on top of Virgin (its not part of any of the basic packages), and if F1 lands on Sky Sports 4 like I think it will, you need to pay for all 4 Sports channels.
HD is an additional fee on top of that for Virgin too.
A lot of money just for F1.
HD is an additional fee on top of that for Virgin too.
A lot of money just for F1.
- 15,494
- UK
It'll be £30-38 (for HD, which is £7 for new customers) per month depending on what other packages you have for a SkySports collection extra. Take about £7 off that if it's only 1&2.
I'd say generally it'll be more expensive with VM, we switched to Sky about 4 years ago. Saved us about £20-30/month on the same package, and at the time the VM broadband was shocking.
As Stotty says, I'm fully expecting the Sky F1 coverage to be of very high quality. They'll be trying to sell a lot of subscriptions off the back of the F1 coup, the idea they'll skimp out on their coverage is a bit flawed, regardless of their current Motorsport coverage.
As for what channel it ends up on? Well, it's unlikely to beat SS1's football coverage, but can't really say much beyond that, we've not heard much from them on what they'll do. Judge them once we know what they're doing.
I'd say generally it'll be more expensive with VM, we switched to Sky about 4 years ago. Saved us about £20-30/month on the same package, and at the time the VM broadband was shocking.
As Stotty says, I'm fully expecting the Sky F1 coverage to be of very high quality. They'll be trying to sell a lot of subscriptions off the back of the F1 coup, the idea they'll skimp out on their coverage is a bit flawed, regardless of their current Motorsport coverage.
As for what channel it ends up on? Well, it's unlikely to beat SS1's football coverage, but can't really say much beyond that, we've not heard much from them on what they'll do. Judge them once we know what they're doing.
- 392
- BEST KOREA
- SaberFire89
- SaberFire89
My thoughts exactly. I've been watching F1 since '94, but I'm jobless and struggle to make rent every month. Paying that much money to watch F1 is just madness.
Really do wonder why the BBC has suddenly decided it can't support F1 until the original rights contract expired. Must be something to do with that ridiculous Salford move.
Similar threads
Latest Posts
-
-
Introduce Yourself! New Member Introductions Thread — Come Say Hello!
- Latest: homey2009-_-
-
-
-
