Quote:
Originally Posted by littleman
Unless race promoters and Liberty have the same financial stake in any GP, why would Liberty care whether the event runs at a loss or not?
If nobody turns up to watch a GP, what financial hardship to Liberty suffer?
Apart from the tens of millions they receive from race promoters, their real income comes from selling the TV rights and developing the same through other platforms.
It's been obvious to me for years,that Despicable BE,and now Liberty, aren't really bothered about the number of real spectators who physically attend over a race weekend.That's the promoters concern, not theirs, they get paid regardless. The only thing that will scare Liberty is if TV audiences drop through the floor.
The "fair" way forward is for both the race promoter and Commercial Rights Holder (Liberty), to share a common interest in the financial success of each other.
|
Liberty will eventually suffer if TV audiences drop through the floor. Advertisers won't want to pay the TV broadcasters, if no one is watching, no matter how good the racing is. This has been a long running problem with IndyCar for years. It would also be very short sighted of Liberty not to care if events run at a loss because no one shows up. It's the track owners and the race promoters that initially suffer and this is another problem that's plagued IndyCar for years. Again advertisers won't want to pay TV broadcasters to show a load of empty stands. Races tracks have come and gone from the calendar.
In 2015 the series lost one of its most iconic races, the Milwaukee Mile. Admitedly though, it has got back two equally iconic tracks in Road America and Watkins Glen. Spectator attendance and TV audiences are up but IndyCar is not out of the woods yet by any means.
I hoped when Liberty took over, they would bring a different mindset and they have said how Europe is key to the future of F1 but I suppose the problem is, Liberty have inherited the deals Bernie made and in there lies the rub.