F1 goes to Sky sports

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Osella

b) introduce the free-to-air championship where points are only awarded for the relevant races

I think the rest of the world might think that is a little odd. Maybe even a little arrogant.

[Marbot]

Indeed. There seems to be some suggestion that F1 is on an even more slippery slope to oblivion than it was already (it's been doing that for a few years now, apparently), now that the BBC will only be broadcasting half of the races to people who were watching them all for nothing. People in countries that have always paid for the privilege of watching F1, will be wondering what all of the fuss is about.

[dan_ferguson]

I've followed F1 since 1988, and have watched pretty much every race transmitted live (can't remember when all races started going out live), and am hugely annoyed by this deal.

Three things bother me most,

a) Cost - an obvious comment, but £14.50 per month (Virgin) may be impossible to justify, given that I have no interest in other sports shown. You can also bet thet offerings will be split across Sky Sports 1, 2 etc.

b) Lack of continuity from race to race - different presentations, content and personnel may make championship disjointed to follow.

c) Commentary teams - this could make or break Skys success, not only with its own broadcasts but also tempting people 'in' from BBC. The BBC commentary / anchor team is (IMO) currently excellent, from Crofty on a Friday, through Brundles informed race commentary, to Eddie Jordans post race vortex of confusion, so I believe that both companies would be well advised to share this team.

I will wait and see how plans pan out before commiting my hard earned cash.

[JeremySmith]

Could you explain the 14.50 per month with Virgin please?

[Al Weyman]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Indeed. There seems to be some suggestion that F1 is on an even more slippery slope to oblivion than it was already (it's been doing that for a few years now, apparently), now that the BBC will only be broadcasting half of the races to people who were watching them all for nothing. People in countries that have always paid for the privilege of watching F1, will be wondering what all of the fuss is about.

I'll tell you what the fuss is about Marbot, those people probably dont have to already pay out for a service like we do with the BBC.

[dan_ferguson]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Could you explain the 14.50 per month with Virgin please?

As per Virgn Media website - Sky Sports channels are classed as premium channels, so increase what I pay for my XL package by a further £14.50.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I'll tell you what the fuss is about Marbot, those people probably dont have to already pay out for a service like we do with the BBC.

So you wouldn't be as annoyed if it were Sky taking over from ITV?

[JeremySmith]

I will have a closer look at my ATT U-Verse account and tell you what I pay in American $ each month and how it breaks down...

[JeremySmith]

If you guys go to the link you can see how much NASCAR Speed TV airs..

http://www.racefantv.com/USTV.htm

[Adam43]

I don't know if this is allowed, but I'm watching Indycar on sky!

[Mr V]

I'm watching the golf on Sky!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I don't know if this is allowed, but I'm watching Indycar on sky!

It was quite a good race.

[Marbot]

This is the danger that F1 faces. People might actually start watching something else instead.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Marbot

This is the danger that F1 faces. People might actually start watching something else instead.

Or maybe we're only watching Indycar/Golf because F1 isn't on ?

[Cynic]

Originally Posted by Marbot

So you wouldn't be as annoyed if it were Sky taking over from ITV?

I think you're missing the point. I think this is a reference to the TV license, which has to be paid regardless of what channel you're watching. If people weren't already paying 145 quid a year to the treasury maybe some of the ire at having to pay more to Sky wouldn't be an issue. Do other countries have an equivalent?

Although in a way it could be a moot point: according to the wording the tv license is actually a tax on 'television receiving equipment'. The fact that the BBC receives an annual budget roughly the same as the income from this tax is apparently coincidence.

[Dead-Eye]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I'll tell you what the fuss is about Marbot, those people probably dont have to already pay out for a service like we do with the BBC.

If you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence the list of countries that don't is not very long.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

If you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence the list of countries that don't is not very long.

If that list is accurate, then compared to Austria €335.14, Denmark €303.35, Germany €204.36, Norway €315.57, Sweden €232.47, the UK's price of €174.99 isn't too bad.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

If you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence the list of countries that don't is not very long.

So the traditional 'heartland' countries of F1 viewing mostly pay for a TV licence of some sort.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

This is the danger that F1 faces. People might actually start watching something else instead.

No they won't..

[LC2guy]

I'm not sure of the difference between F1 going to Sky, and other mediums. For instance, Autosport have had a lot to say on this matter, but to read what they say, you have to pay for the internet to view their "free" site & read titbits, but if you want a more in depth report about it, subscribe to their site, or pay for their magazine ( like paying for Sky ). Nothing in life is free, its a shame its leaving BBC, but if sky do for F1 what they've done for other sports, it may just be a good thing in the long run for everyone. At the end of the day, we all prioritise our own lives. If i think a month of sky is better than a night out ( cost about the same ), then i'll go for it, and stay in that 1 night. All in my opinion of course, others are entitled to theirs.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by LC2guy

I'm not sure of the difference between F1 going to Sky, and other mediums. For instance, Autosport have had a lot to say on this matter, but to read what they say, you have to pay for the internet to view their "free" site & read titbits, but if you want a more in depth report about it, subscribe to their site, or pay for their magazine ( like paying for Sky ). Nothing in life is free, its a shame its leaving BBC, but if sky do for F1 what they've done for other sports, it may just be a good thing in the long run for everyone. At the end of the day, we all prioritise our own lives. If i think a month of sky is better than a night out ( cost about the same ), then i'll go for it, and stay in that 1 night. All in my opinion of course, others are entitled to theirs.

Great post.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

No they won't..

Whatever it is that Sky/BBC are doing, it certainly isn't conducive to adding more viewers to F1 in the UK.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Whatever it is that Sky/BBC are doing, it certainly isn't conducive to adding more viewers to F1 in the UK.

I think you are right on the money here.
I used to watch a lot of cricket, then half the matches went off to pay TV and I did not follow. The result is that I began to miss a lot of the discussion and commentary that took place around the pay matches and I no longer new the nuances of what was going on around the national side.

The action then somehow began to feel incomplete, as I was missing half the matches, and now I no longer watch any cricket at all!

It is not something I have done deliberately, but it has represented the end of my involvement with a sport I both played as a kid and loved to idle away some time watching and listening to on TV, usually on in the background while I was doing something else, watch wickets fall etc.

Now I just really can't be bothered, I miss it, but it is just not the same!

[JeremySmith]

So I pay for TV $79.91 per month for TV U-Verse 100 package which includes the Speed Channel..

For internet I pay $46.80 per month.

For my mobile with AT&T I pay $100.00 per month..

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

So I pay for TV $79.91 per month for TV U-Verse 100 package which includes the Speed Channel..

For internet I pay $46.80 per month.

For my mobile with AT&T I pay $100.00 per month..

You must have too much money Or none left at all

Well your TV package works out about roughly £50, not bad, i pay £72 (although that is Sky multiroom and HD), thats on top of the annual TV licence. (£145.50 per year)

I have you on the internet, you pay £29, i pay £8, although i have to pay my phone line rental (£12 per month i think???)

I also have you on mobile, you pay £61.50, i pay £10, although, admittedly, i have no internet access on that.