News Corp Wants to Buy F1

[Grand Prix]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91096

Media group News Corporation has officially confirmed it plans to look into a joint takeover of Formula 1 with an Italian investment company that has close links to Fiat.

After weeks of speculation about News Corporation's possible plans for F1, a statement issued by Italian investment group EXOR on Tuesday night revealed that early negotiations were underway.

EXOR stated that it planned to approach other stakeholders in the sport to consider how viable a takeover bid was, prior to making any approach to F1's current owners - CVC Capital Partners - or its commercial boss Bernie Ecclestone.

The statement said: "EXOR, one of Europe's largest listed investment companies, and News Corporation, the global media group, confirm that they are in the early stages of exploring the possibility of creating a consortium with a view to formulating a long-term plan for the development of Formula 1 in the interests of the participants and the fans.

"Over the coming weeks and months, EXOR and News Corporation will approach potential minority partners and key stakeholders in the sport. There can be no certainty that this will lead to an approach to Formula 1’s current owners."

EXOR’s involvement is intriguing because the company is headed by John Elkann, chairman and chief executive of Ferrari’s parent company Fiat.

Furthermore, EXOR is controlled by the Agnelli family - which has long had close ties to Ferrari. The company owns a 30 per cent stake in the Fiat company as well as a 60 per cent interest in Juventus Football Club.

The official statement by EXOR and News Corporation comes just days after Ecclestone said that the chances of a takeover by Rupert Murdoch’s business interests was 'close to zero.’

"It's media driven," he told Reuters. "It looks very much like someone who is trying to see if they can make (money). All of these people that get involved with these things, they get some victims and say 'We can make this happen, I'm sure we can do this' and then all they do is keep pumping fees in."

When asked about the possibility of F1 moving onto a pay-TV platform, Ecclestone said: "If, and I think the chances are close to zero, but if Murdoch was to buy certainly he'd have to broadcast some free to air like it is now."

Hmmm. Rupert Murdoch. Close ties to Fiat. Current Concorde Agreement expires next year.

So with a newscorp and FIAT running F1, and Jean Todt as FIA President that therefore means...

LET THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES BEGIN!!!

Just kidding. Will be interesting to hear if you think Rupert Murdoch or Bernie Eccelstone is the lesser of two evils.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

And both Bernie and CVC have said it is not for sale.

 

[senamic]

Isn't that kinda like when someone is trying to become PM though, or at least head of their party? Deny that you wish to stand on top of the pecking order, but then after a few weeks of leaks say that if you were forced to, you would gratefully accept the position? In the meantime, the outgoing PM (or in this case, company) says that its not for sale, no negotiations and so on...


I personally don't think it will be sold, but it may very well be the case, we can't just take CVC's word for it on this one

 

[Jim Prower]

I don't trust media corporations running motorsport series.

You end up with this.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Do you guys really think the teams are just going to let News Corporation in, drive everything into the ground, walk away with a massive profit and leave the teams to deal with the mess?

 

[BH-21]

They at least will know how to improve visibility and coverage of the races so people can actually see them. Regardless of what you think of them personally, they aren't completely stupid and FOX has a good record with sporting events particularlly baseball.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

They at least will know how to improve visibility and coverage of the races so people can actually see them. Regardless of what you think of them personally, they aren't completely stupid and FOX has a good record with sporting events particularlly baseball.

From what I've read (and I may be mistaken), if News Corp took over F1 there would be a good chance F1 would end up on pay TV (in Europe at least, but that's the core market), which doesn't really improve coverage. However, Rupert Murdoch's son runs the Ten Network down here so I can assume Rupert would be kind to his son and let his company broadcast F1 free-to-air.

 

[BH-21]

Well I can only speak for the US market as that is what I'm familiar with. Since FOX has done the coverage of NASCAR, it has only improved its viewership and more sponsors have joined the racing teams and everyone is doing well. In countries that don't have as many comercials, yeah it may seem to be a bad thing it going all pay per view. Its hardly the fault of Murdock that those TV outlets aren't fiscally viable any other way, not only for coverage but for the sponsors of the racers.

 

[astrosdude91]

If F1 ends up on FOX full time, then I can see every race being tape delayed to mid day like they do with the four races a year that play on FOX. Regardless though, SPEED channel is a FOX (and by extension News Corp/Murdoch) owned network. So whatever happens, F1 will almost certainly be the same story for US coverage as it is at the moment.

Here's my opinion. I know Bernie doesn't have a very good track record for being truthful with what he says. But I'll agree with the old man. I think this is mostly media fueled, and I doubt any exchanges or deals will happen anytime soon.

 

[Grand Prix]

Isn't that kinda like when someone is trying to become PM though, or at least head of their party? Deny that you wish to stand on top of the pecking order, but then after a few weeks of leaks say that if you were forced to, you would gratefully accept the position? In the meantime, the outgoing PM (or in this case, company) says that its not for sale, no negotiations and so on...


I personally don't think it will be sold, but it may very well be the case, we can't just take CVC's word for it on this one

Agreed. Right now Bernie and Rupert are probably going like this in their respective lairs:

I don't think anything will come of it, but I thought the ties to Ferrari were highly humourous (and a tad suspicious).

 

[DK]

I don't want to imagine a friend-of-Ferrari's-management-board-controlled-F1, seeing as it would bring in ridiculous rules to favour Ferrari. [/tinfoil hat]

 

[prisonermonkeys]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91178

If News Corp want in, the teams will have something to say about it. And if the rights are up for sale, they want to buy into it.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/05/07/75/

And the teams say the sport needs to stay free-to-air.

I can't believe people actually thought Murdoch could and would buy into the sport and do whatever the hell he wanted whilst the teams simply took it lying down.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Even Bernie things pay-per-view is a stupid idea:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91249

 

[IceMan PJN]

They at least will know how to improve visibility and coverage of the races so people can actually see them. Regardless of what you think of them personally, they aren't completely stupid and FOX has a good record with sporting events....

Imagine mascots and goofy on-screen graphics popping up in the middle of races every so many minutes.

Since FOX has done the coverage of NASCAR, it has only improved its viewership and more sponsors have joined the racing teams and everyone is doing well.

From the viewership figures I recall, NASCAR viewership doesn't seem to have really improved. Some time back I dug up figures for Daytona 500 viewership, and the Daytona 500 viewership is similar to what it was a decade ago, two decades ago, and even back to 1974.

In 1974, the Daytona 500 had 12.5 million viewers, at a time when the US population was around 209 million and there were far fewer channels available for people to watch. Over the next several years viewership increased, up to 20.9 million in 1978, when the US population was at around 221 million, give or take. It then immediately declined, down to the 10 to 13 million viewer range all the way through to 2000, by which point the US population was much larger, at around 281 million, so even though the population kept going up, Daytona 500 viewership did not.

From 2001 to 2008 it was up, in the 17 to 19 million range, with the US population exceeding 300 million by 2007. However, in 2009 viewership dropped to just 16 million and in 2010 it was just 13.3 million, which is sad considering that's not much more than the 1974 Daytona 500 had when the US population was around a third lower and people had far fewer viewing alternatives.

Anyway, the facts don't seem to support Fox really doing anything to boost viewership for NASCAR.

 

[Grand Prix]

Imagine mascots and goofy on-screen graphics popping up in the middle of races every so many minutes.

Now I'm morbidly curious as to what kind of mascots Fox would have come up with for F1.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Imagine mascots and goofy on-screen graphics popping up in the middle of races every so many minutes.

But why? Bernie has said it's not for sale. CVC have said it's not for sale. FOTA have said they'll have something to say about any change in ownership of the commercial rights. And the FIA have said they're not a part of any negotiations. Bernie's analogy in Istanbul was right: right now, what News Corp is looking at is like someone trying to buy the BBC when the BBC isn't for sale.

 

[BH-21]

In the 1970s a body could watch F1 races on TV and I did. In the early 80's they disappeared in the US around here from TV and haven't been back. Which coincided with a movement in europe that went full tilt about then and is only now beginning to move back the other way slightly.

No disrespect to IceMan PJN but putting unsubstantiated so called facts up is a typical political trick of a certain persuasion, meaning you don't have any sources posted or links to them. The inmature graphics at the beginning of your post really sink it before you even get to what you wrote. Suffice it to say, I doubt you ever watch FOX and have an axe to grind with them over something unrelated to racing. I also doubt you watched Darlington this last weekend, FOX did a good job from what I saw, and I'm not a NASCAR fan.

 

[NFSCARBON1]

I hope Formula 1 never becomes pay per view. It's bad enough having to miss football (soccer) matches because they are on SkySports (one of Murdoch's companies).

I trust Bernie is telling the truth about F1 not being for sale, hopefully it will stay that way for a long time to come.

 

[Tired Tyres]

I hope Formula 1 never becomes pay per view. It's bad enough having to miss football (soccer) matches because they are on SkySports (one of Murdoch's companies).

I trust Bernie is telling the truth about F1 not being for sale, hopefully it will stay that way for a long time to come.

Formula 1 did become PPV on Sky during ITV's era but it didn't last very long. It was in 2002 I think. Not a great year to try something like that!

I trust Bernie as well. If he says it's not for sale, it is for sale.