Why Pay TV would be good for F1

[obiron]

I KNOW this is going to cause lots of replies but here goes............

I want F1 on SKY TV!!!!!

Why? because then we won't get those ****ing annoying advert breaks every 10 minutes or miss the driver interviews.

How about a mid week programme detailing all of the gossip in the paddock (see itv-f1 website to see how much there is to talk abou)

Not to mention full coverage and analysis of testing, practice, warm up, details driver/team interviews, post race analysis, live stats with interactive so you can follow the performance of your favorite drivers (did Heindfeld even get one lap of coverage last week, even though he finished 3rd?)

With the advent of interactive TV you could even watch your own teams rather than what the producer wants you to see.

Come on guys, the market is there, look what it has done for football.

Obiron.

[JoMiSaP]

The advantages of pay TV are obvious and I think that almost every fan would pay to be closer to the action with all the interactive features.

But I feel that there is still a need for open TV. First to get the manufacturers the coverage they demand and second to attract those occasional viewers who may later be willing to pay for a more detailed coverage.

[KC]

I already pay to damn much for TV service and do not get the F1 races now. For another 16 dollars a month I can get Speedvision, but its hard to justify 50 dollars a month for cable service when I really only watch 15 channels out of the 180 I would receive.

By placing f1 on Pay-per-View only, the effective TV audience would be like that of professional boxing, about 15% of the previous free market. The auto manufacturers will not be willing to expend $75 million dollars a season for a reduced viewing audience. PPV coverage could effectively destroy F1 as we knwo it now.

[obiron]

Originally posted by KC
I already pay to damn much for TV service and do not get the F1 races now. For another 16 dollars a month I can get Speedvision, but its hard to justify 50 dollars a month for cable service when I really only watch 15 channels out of the 180 I would receive.

By placing f1 on Pay-per-View only, the effective TV audience would be like that of professional boxing, about 15% of the previous free market. The auto manufacturers will not be willing to expend $75 million dollars a season for a reduced viewing audience. PPV coverage could effectively destroy F1 as we knwo it now.

UK football (soccer) is on a subscription channel but not PPV basis. I don't watch F1 because the big manufacturers are involved, They are involved because I watch it! We have a touring cars series in the UK which are supposedly road legal vehicles with racing mods. 10 years ago it was all private teams buying cars and engines from manufacturers with about 12 different models racing. Lots of gentleman drivers, tails out round corners and great spectator sport. Then the big MFRs came in. Now you can't compete unless your team has a £3m ($5m) budget and there are only 3 manufacturers left. F1 has gone the same way. Only Ferrari make their own engines and chassis and they are owned by Fiat. Look at ice racing, once an amateur sport for fun now BMW make a specially shortened 3 series just for ice racing. The same with truck racing which started as something the F1 boys did at the end of the season and they did not need the cabs anymore. Now full blooded race trucks are a special division at most manufacturers.

F1 does not need the big mfrs (it doesn't happen in Indy racing), but it does need people passionate about the sport.

Obiron

[badoer fan]

You'd probably get more adverts on Sky than on ITV

[Liz]

Put it on PPV and you'd likely lose the entire Western Hemisphere market. (Remember the USA very nearly had no F1 coverage OF ANY KIND this year.)

I watch the races on free TV (Speedvision) because they're on. But F1 is far too boring to pay $20 per race to watch it. If it went exclusively to PPV, I'd be more likely to watch it on Live Timing off the Net.

[Billy_Hunt]

I've been crying out for Digital coverage for quite some time ,leave it on a free to view channel aswell and give people the choice.
I would be quite happy to pay per view to watch the digital coverage but better still would be for it to be part of the sky sports package as it is with Football & rugby etc.
I'm quite sure Sky wouldn't put ads in during a race they know what sports fans like ,their football coverage is second to none it gets very hard to watch it on the free channels once you get used to Skys coverage.
Sky is already giving F1 a bit of behind the scenes coverage in some of it's motor sport programmes.
So bring it on now !

[R]

For the sport, in the long run, it must stay on free TV.

The die-hard followers (myself included) would of course watch it even if it was on pay TV.

But to generate new interest, it must stay free. Those who would pay to watch it are only those who are already interested in it. There would be a huge reduction in new fans if the sport would go to pay TV.

And the casual viewers would of course also be lost.

In the short run, a transfer to pay TV would probably pay off. In the long run, it would not.

[Minardi fan]

Making F1 pay-per-view would alienate too many fans. Fine, have extended coverage on Sky or whatever, but there are those of us who would simply not be able to justify buying digital/cable tv just for F1 races - the cost is too great. Keep F1 on both.

[Jay]

If F1 knows what's good for it, they will make it free for everyone. Otherwise, they are just exercising a cash grab. They should be thankful for the fans just watching, nevertheless directly paying for it.

[Valve Bounce]

I read KC's post and I was going to click on the quote and say "Hey!! I agree with this". Then I reached Liz's post, and I was going to quote and agree with that too. Then I read Billy's, MF's, Jay's and R and I can't quote everyone - I'd get kicked out for flooding.
I personally would like to have digital if it didn't cost too much, but on the other hand, I don't have a digital TV. Then I thought about all the people in the third world countries who are mad on F1, and who certainly cannot afford cable or even Satellite TV or just don't have such facilities where they live. Just think how many people would not be able to watch F1, not by choice but simply because they cannot afford it or don't have the facilities. I had to fight, plead, cajole with the Hong Kong Government's Property Mangement people for 4 years before we got a satellite dish on the roof of Government quarters so we could watch F1 and Star TV. I think the manufacturers are spot on to want to keep F1 on free to air TV, and if one of the companies want to put it on cable and provide digital facilities, then those who can afford to watch a premium telecast of the race without interuption can do so. But don't take it away from us poor schmucks who either cannot afford it or simply do not have the facilities.

[obiron]

The emphasis of the original statement was meant for UK viewers, I did not realise the board was used worldwide. So for those outside teh UK, a brief run down of our curent TV network. (bear with me because it does nave a point)...

We have 5 free to air channels by traditional broadcasters BBC (state owned) have two channels, ITV have one and is now effectively owned by two production companies - Carlton and Granada, Channel 4 and Channel 5 both of which are independant and commission most of their programs. We also have analogue satellite (SKY) which is being turned off in 3 months time to make everyone switch to the Digital satellites (SKY again). We also have digital TV available from transmitters (ON Digital) and via cable (lots of companies. 10 Years ago, football (soccer) had the top teams form their own league and the rights to that were bought exclusively by SKY, who gave scraps to the BBC and ITV to keep the politicians happy. Almost immediately SKY put it onto a subscription only service (you pay monthly for the channel) There was uproar!. Ten years later, Manchester United are the richest sports club in the world, and the leage has just signed a £300 million deal for the TV rights for the next 5 years (This is a domestic leage of a country the size of Florida remember). Last week, there was over 140 hours of football or football related coverage on subscription TV in the UK. The pre/post coverage is exceptional, the ingame stats are second to none and they now have a thing called player cam where you can follow one player around. This means that they have to have just tons of cameras at each event.

Now to the point...

If you want exceptional coverage of your favorite sport, then it comes at a price. During a 90 minute race in the UK we will get 5 advert breaks. If the race overruns or is at an odd time, the coverage gets truncated and we get no post race analysis, and no driver interviews. FINE if you are a causal viewer but I am a fan. I want to be able to watch the whole race uninterrupted (we don't get many full course yellow flags where you can go to adverts like you do in Indy/NASCAR) and I want the discussions after the event. If this means paying £6 per month or even £3 per race (the costs of sports channel subs and movie rental) then fine. The race is the highlight of my TV fortnight, and I want the choice of how to watch my sport.

Obiron

[R]

When you put it like that, I have to agree. Keep the races on free to air TV so that anyone who wants to can watch, and have coverage on pay TV for those who want extra goodies.

[angst]

Obiron, I don't think that because football was so successful on pay TV that it is necessarily a good idea for F1. The manufacturers and sponsors are involved because their brand message is beamed to so many people. Whereas football will always have a huge fan base because people go down to their team's ground and cheer on their heroes regularly - aswell as the whole local/family loyalty thing that goes with football. These basics aren't there with F1. The manufacturers will not allow F1 to go to pay TV (at least not exclusively, and if it's not exclusive it's questionable how much somebody like Sky would be willing to pay for it) because they want maximum coverage for their products.

[Liz]

Same here - people who want to pay $20 a race to see F1 on digital (assuming it's available in your area, and it is not available in ours) should have that option, but the rest of us should be able to access it on Speedvision or something like it. I might watch the odd race on PPV if I had the option. I would assuredly not watch it if that was my only option.