Quote:
Originally Posted by tux
Perhaps sense of entitlement was the wrong phrase and i apologise if that caused any offence but it just puzzles me that people feel that F1 should be FTA when no other major sport is FTA. Why would F1 not move towards a PPV model in other countries when its been proven to generate a large amount of money, after all thats why Liberty bought it.
I can see the point of view that losing FTA coverage helps to reinforce the falling viewership figures and i agree that it doesn't help but i think a large part of that can also be attributed to the "show" that we have now.
Regardless, its a shame for everyone who enjoys watching the sport who now wont be able to.
|
I think that you may have misunderstood why Liberty bought out FOM.
FOM is a huge cash cow, which is generated from the income from selling the broadcasting rights of F1, from the contracts with individual circuits for the privilege of holding a F1 race and from various other licencing streams.
However, SKY in the UK certainly doesn't recoup the vast sums that it pays for holding the right to broadcast F1 races; it is a loss leader although their advertisers help to defray some of the costs. Why do you think that Channel 4 didn't even compete to continue their coverage after their contracts finishes at the end of this year?
Just look at the figures. In 2015 when the BBC were still broadcasting F1, the average viewing audience was 3.1 million. By the end of last year, Channel 4's average was down to 1.9 million, whilst SKY only brought in an average of 625,000 and they had to reduce the subscription to even achieve that.
F1 to a broadcaster is not a money-spinner; in fact, it's a drain on their resources. Liberty bought FOM, but they did so because FOM is not a TV broadcaster.