F1 tv viewing set to plummet further

[Peter Mallett]

I believe it has been mentioned already. Yes significant figures but only if they are new viewers. China has been watching the coverage via various means for many years.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

I believe it has been mentioned already. Yes significant figures but only if they are new viewers. China has been watching the coverage via various means for many years.

Peter CCTV is the dominant FTA platform in mainland China. It broadcast F1 during the first, and maybe second years of the Chinese GP. Since then coverage has been spasmodic and relegated to cable or fringe channels.
My understanding is that viewing online streaming has been limited in some cities by the Great Firewall, but where available has good take-up.
Going to CCTV is probably equivalent in Chinese terms to upgrading to full BBC coverage in the UK would be.
Potentially a lot of new viewers, and gaining "authorized" status.
And if you are visiting you will be able to get it on your hotel TV.
By the way Etihad are making a big thing about getting sport onto their in-flight screens. Wonder if Liberty has done a deal with them or Emirates?
Perhaps an effort to get on cruise ship screens would be a good way of getting in front of some disposable income people too.

[Peter Mallett]

Understood. My point was merely that unless they are new viewers the numbers wont add up to much. Thinking holistically.

Etihad and Emirates always include sports programmes in their in flight packages. Even I've had my 15 mins of fame on Emitrates. But perhaps they are talking live streaming of the new F1 coverage.

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Etihad and Emirates always include sports programmes in their in flight packages. Even I've had my 15 mins of fame on Emitrates. But perhaps they are talking live streaming of the new F1 coverage.

I know Emirates don't (or did not up to the end of last year, I have not flown at GP time this year) offer F1 as a live option on their entertainment.
Interestingly they do so with MotoGP, showing full coverage direct to the seat back monitors.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by E.B

I know Emirates don't (or did not up to the end of last year, I have not flown at GP time this year) offer F1 as a live option on their entertainment.
Interestingly they do so with MotoGP, showing full coverage direct to the seat back monitors.

Interesting EB.
Afraid protecting my frequent flyer status maens I am a bit tied to Singapore and their seatbacks are great on movies etc but not very sport oriented.
Everything else is great though and Changi beats Dubai hands down

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Interesting EB.
Afraid protecting my frequent flyer status maens I am a bit tied to Singapore and their seatbacks are great on movies etc but not very sport oriented.
Everything else is great though and Changi beats Dubai hands down

Hi OT...trust you are well. Yes I am for the same reason tied with Emirates, who I use for their frequent sub 24 hour one stop flights to Barcelona.

[wolfhound]

Interesting article on Autosport.com about sky taking over all UK F1 broadcasting rights, (thanks Bernie), pity the article is behind a paywall.

http://classicplus.autosport.com/pre...794.1499371096

[MGDavid]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Interesting article on Autosport.com about sky taking over all UK F1 broadcasting rights, (thanks Bernie), pity the article is behind a paywall.

http://classicplus.autosport.com/pre...794.1499371096

oh the irony...

[Adam43]

It reminds me of that Alanis Morissette song

“It's like rain on your wedding day
It’s like when weekly motorsport magazines used to be free.”

[Peter Mallett]

Adam. Are you saying that the paywall is good? I really don't understand you, including the irony.

If it becomes pay per view then I for one won't bother anyway are you saying the same?

[Akrapovic]

Something something, 10,000 spoons when you're already late.

[Peter Mallett]

Hmm.

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by Adam43

It’s like when weekly motorsport magazines used to be free.

Free sports magazines? I have never seen any in my whole life.

[Peter Mallett]

Nope different thing. We bought those mags because they covered more than formula 1.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Adam. Are you saying that the paywall is good? I really don't understand you, including the irony.

If it becomes pay per view then I for one won't bother anyway are you saying the same?

Not really, I mainly just reacted to the word irony. https://youtu.be/Jne9t8sHpUc

I suppose I didn’t really see the TV coverage and Autosport both behind pay walls as being the same. Even before paywall was a word Autosport was behind one! You always had to buy it! Still, the irony.

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Free sports magazines? I have never seen any in my whole life.

This was my point.

My view on the actual TV coverage? It should be FTA as the sport should want people to watch it.

Thats what I think, but I have a reason why this isn’t that simple and another reason why it might not be a good thing. Neither are well developed theories, or even that serious.

The world is changing, is being on telly that key? How is this all developing? I don’t know. My fave is the beeb, but I have sky for some sport and watch amazon sometimes. And I’m hardly down with the kids.

Now here’s the comedy suggestion. It strikes me F1 was better when less people watched it. In those days, with less inertia, you could make it better without upsetting the stakeholders. Less people watching might mean less money and less vested interests. I’m not totally serious here, but what if F1 was less popular?



Mainly I was just being silly. I’m failing to find F1 that important at the moment so I’m more flippant than most.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by Adam43

My view on the actual TV coverage? It should be FTA as the sport should want people to watch it.

Now here’s the comedy suggestion. It strikes me F1 was better when less people watched it. In those days, with less inertia, you could make it better without upsetting the stakeholders. Less people watching might mean less money and less vested interests. I’m not totally serious here, but what if F1 was less popular?
Mainly I was just being silly. I’m failing to find F1 that important at the moment so I’m more flippant than most.

Wisdom said in Jest etc Adam

Yes F1, and the people in it have started to take themselves much too seriously. And with the investment involved there is little wonder that has happened.
That gives us a few problems.
1. Organisational and team navel gazing
2. Exposure to some pretty ill informed media and online critcs.
3. Need to appeal to the great unwashed rather than just a niche, knowledgeable and well informed group (like us)

[VIVA GT]

Regarding what happens when F1 is completely hidden behind a paywall.
I think we have a good analogy here in the UK with Touring Car Racing. The BTCC (admittedly, more of a circus than pure motor racing) has tremendous following (on TV, in the written media and actually at the races, good sponsorship (many household names) and capacity grids of 32 cars. Every meeting gets full coverage on mainstream TV (ITV4) which is FTA. BTCC cars are built to specific regulations for races only in the BTCC.
Admittedly it's a new for this year series, but there will be a series of races for TCR cars. TCR cars are manufacturer built, they race all over The World including a World Championship and the cars are cheaper to buy and run than BTCC cars, but apparently also give exciting & competitive racing.. There is no mainstream TV coverage planned for these races.
Admittedly, it is a new series for this year, and we know that money is tight everywhere, but there are only 13 cars entered for the first race with only 9 confirmed for the whole year.
So, my reasoning is that I am sure that the lack of mainstream TV coverage is a major factor in teams / drivers being unable to attract the relevant sponsorship to compete in the series, and I feel that the lessening of interest in F1 is having the same effect. For example, I know that they have had a disastrous time over the past few seasons, but even the mighty McLaren is unable to attract a title sponsor! The costs of running in F1 are enormous (and obscene), this type of situation cannot go on forever.

[Armco Bender]

Most noticeable the lack of sponsors on the cars at Australia.
Even Ferraris Malboro colours have shrunk to a little white stripe on the shark fin.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Not really, I mainly just reacted to the word irony. https://youtu.be/Jne9t8sHpUc

I suppose I didn’t really see the TV coverage and Autosport both behind pay walls as being the same. Even before paywall was a word Autosport was behind one! You always had to buy it! Still, the irony.
This was my point.

I understand the irony, and not being a subscriber to Autosport any more (they had my money for 40 odd years; that was enough), I cannot say whether this article is a new one, a repeat or a re-hash of one that they did about 2 years ago.

At that time they also put the article, which was a critical piece about Mr E giving Sky the sole broadcasting rights to the UK behind their paywall. In turn, I started a thread on the Autosport forum pointing out the irony of Autosport (who do allow non-subscribers a certain number of free views of most of their articles on their website) deciding that an article criticising BCE for signing a contract to put broadcasting behind a paywall should also be put behind a paywall. That is irony!

It is also ironic that most responders in that thread understood what I meant, but replies from the Autosport team indicated that the irony whizzed straight over their heads.

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I understand the irony, and not being a subscriber to Autosport any more (they had my money for 40 odd years; that was enough), I cannot say whether this article is a new one, a repeat or a re-hash of one that they did about 2 years ago.

At that time they also put the article, which was a critical piece about Mr E giving Sky the sole broadcasting rights to the UK behind their paywall. In turn, I started a thread on the Autosport forum pointing out the irony of Autosport (who do allow non-subscribers a certain number of free views of most of their articles on their website) deciding that an article criticising BCE for signing a contract to put broadcasting behind a paywall should also be put behind a paywall. That is irony!

It is also ironic that most responders in that thread understood what I meant, but replies from the Autosport team indicated that the irony whizzed straight over their heads.

This is a new article as it had new information in the form that sky have control over who has the FTA element for the British GP and highlights package. As the deal was done when BT was in competition with BT sport Bernie got a deal for $1 Billion over 5 years (enough to run a top midfield F1 team over the same period or pay Ferrari's contribution from F1).

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

This is a new article as it had new information in the form that sky have control over who has the FTA element for the British GP and highlights package. As the deal was done when BT was in competition with BT sport Bernie got a deal for $1 Billion over 5 years (enough to run a top midfield F1 team over the same period or pay Ferrari's contribution from F1).

One thing I don't expect is in the article is the fact that is highly likely that Liberty are cursing Mr E for the deal that that he struck with Sky. And yet more irony.

Liberty are now in the position that their UK subsidiary, Virgin Media, are having to pay Sky for the material that they, Liberty, produce through the FOM broadcasting facilities which have the sole rights to all worldwide production of most of the filming that takes place over a race weekend.

The only bits that FOM don't control are the media's own studio work, on and off circuit, limited access to the pits and paddock, and some of the weekend interviewing of teams and drivers. The rest is seen through the cameras under the control of FOM.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Wisdom said in Jest etc Adam

Yes F1, and the people in it have started to take themselves much too seriously. And with the investment involved there is little wonder that has happened.
That gives us a few problems.
1. Organisational and team navel gazing
2. Exposure to some pretty ill informed media and online critcs.
3. Need to appeal to the great unwashed rather than just a niche, knowledgeable and well informed group (like us)

Does this mean we need people to stop watching for the sport to be saved?

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Does this mean we need people to stop watching for the sport to be saved?

If that's the case I think it's safe to say F1 has a future...

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by Adam43

It strikes me F1 was better when less people watched it. In those days, with less inertia, you could make it better without upsetting the stakeholders. Less people watching might mean less money and less vested interests. I’m not totally serious here, but what if F1 was less popular?

See IndyCar. Great entertainment, but the lack of popularity hurts.

[Mekola]

The entire Iberian-Americas market is quite angry quite sad since F1 now has pay-per-view transmissions in both Spain and Latin America. Spectators argue that it's enough they pay monthly to cableoperators and broadcasters (F1 is not seen on air TV since about a decade in that area) to pay extra to see F1 in this market not able to have enough subscribers.
It's seen they didn't learn from Bernie's experience with F1+ from Canal Plus in the nineties.