Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Mallett
Surely what we are saying here is that it is not popular enough to be sustainable on PPV?
|
surely its not sustainable on FTA either though is it?
certainly i agree that if it was on FTA more people would watch (or rather would be able to watch...the two however are not synonymous) but if more people watch, then FOM would be able to (and would be justified to) command a larger licensing fee from the network who wishes to broadcast it via an FTA channel.
the question then becomes, does a publicly funded network like the BBC (or CBC in Canada) have the right to pay such a fee for sport that has a negligible public or national interest and in effect subsides the commercial activities of multi billion dollar multinationals? can they justify that to the taxpayers who fund it?
of course a non publicly funded/privately owned network chose to make a bid and show it FTA but then how would they monetize it in a way where they could afford to broadcast it FTA.
the most obvious solution to that would be to start showing commercials during the race...at which point i suspect many here would be declaring how F1 is pants and that they will never watch again!
ultimately though if viewership goes up, then a subscription based network will just come in and make a higher bid then an FTA channel can offer because they can pass that fee on to its subscriber base.
anyways, the best one can hope for is a split of some sort between subscription/paywall based and FTA...which to their credit seems to be the model Liberty is attempting to pursue.
same for the magazines...a selection of free articles on their website and then the more in depth stuff behind a paywall.