[Rumours] BBC to drop F1?

[P38 in workshop]

The days of the BBC sports department being the Bat and Ball Club are still not over.The organisation is currently trying to run four national television channels and rather a lot of national radio stations,some of which have an audience that struggles to reach five figures.The stirring form the Murdoch empire,itself a large sprawling organisation that has to operate with commercial disciplines alien to the BBC,is opportunistic and no figures for the amount they might be willing to pay for Formula One are presented.
The good thing is that the FOM television feed is very good and would form the core of any coverage.If the budget restrictions meant that we had to forgo the wit and wisdom of Eddie Jordan,we could probably adjust.A significant selling point for FOM ought to be the demographic profile of the audience that would follow.Has there ever been any analysis of this aspect by the BBC?From a personal point of view I will only watch free to air broadcasts and I expect there is a fair chance that something would appear online in due course.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Its £140, but thats £140 if you choose to watch F1 or not watch it because they have dumped the rights. Either way, you have to still pay it if your in the UK, so whilst you are paying it anyway, you may as well get some programming you actually like.

I can't think of anyone who could do a better job than what the BBC currently does, any other broadcaster's effort would surely be a step backwards.

I pay extra for the Speed Channel on top of an AT&T package, how is that $200.00 sounding now..

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Setting aside whether we want it or not, lets look at where Sky would put Formula 1

Sunday early afternoons:
Spring time and Autumn Sky Sports 1: English Premiership football
Summer Sky Sports 1: Cricket

Spring and Autumn Sky Sports 2: English Premiership Rugby / Rugby League
Summer Sky Sports 2: Super Rugby & Tri-nations ... Cricket (when something deemed more important is on SS1)

All Year Around Sky Sports 3: Golf Euro tour and Occasional early coverage of US Tour events.

Spring and Autumn Sky Sports 4: Scottish football (not every weekend but could difficult to get it's choice of matches (possibly an old firm game) scheduled to de-conflict with F1)
Summer Sky Sports 4: Overflow coverage and usually lunch time showing of previous evenings big event Masters Football/Boxing etc

Sky Sports 4 would appear to be the best fit for most of the year, besides Scottish Football, there would also be NFL most likely on 4 at Brazilian GP time.

All of this before even considering Qually coverage on a Saturday lunchtime.

[Paradise City]

Originally Posted by garcon

Prepare to be surprised.

The story is nothing more than typical, baseless Murdoch propoganda.

The story was reported to deliberately depress the price, yes. Does that mean that the report is baseless, no.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

All of this before even considering Qually coverage on a Saturday lunchtime.

Saturday lunchtime when the quali would clash between the pre-3pm blackout Premier League Football matches ...

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Nothing is free is it though, in England you pay a yearly license fee for BBC coverage.. I have no idea how much that is these days? $200.00 per year maybe..

I am used to paying for seeing F1 via the Speed Channel as part of an AT&T package...I want to watch F1 so I pay the fee...

The BBC licence fee is a sunk cost.
You get to pay it whether you like watching anything they put on TV or not.
Therefore if there is something you actually want to watch on it becomes free to watch, hence FREE!!!
END.

[garcon]

Originally Posted by rocketcar

Rediculous to axe f1 on the bbc, axe some of the rubish they show for the liberal left on bbc 4!

Oh come on.

Statements like that should be left to the kind of knuckle dragging BNP supporter who thinks anything more intellectual than the Sun crossword is a communist plot.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

The BBC licence fee is a sunk cost.
You get to pay it whether you like watching anything they put on TV or not.
Therefore if there is something you actually want to watch on it becomes free to watch, hence FREE!!!
END.

What do you mean by a sunk cost?

TV in the UK isn't free to watch, you have to pay the licence fee before you can watch, ergo it's not free.

[Paradise City]

If you look at the comments in the article, Saward is convinced that its going to be axed having consulted other sources.

Here's a strong defence from McLaren's Whitmarsh and Autosport for continued BBC coverage.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92472

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by garcon

Oh come on.

Statements like that should be left to the kind of knuckle dragging BNP supporter who thinks anything more intellectual than the Sun crossword is a communist plot.

It's a sad reflection that people criticize BBC4 without having watched it, when actually it shows some of the best stuff on the BBC. If your IQ is higher than your shoe size there's something for you there in terms of quality drama, films, documentaries and some comedy (Charlie Brooker's BBC work used to air on BBC4).

EDIT : I'll go further and say that a lot of stuff on BBC4 is the best on British television. It's absolutely criminal that things like the original (Swedish) Wallander amongst other things are hidden away on BBC4.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

It's a sad reflection that people criticize BBC4 without having watched it, when actually it shows some of the best stuff on the BBC. If your IQ is higher than your shoe size there's something for you there.

I'd agree with that, there are some excellent programmes on BBC4; seems to have become the new BBC2.

[Paradise City]

BBC4 programs are good and as cheap as chips to make anyway. [They could scrap BBC3 tho']

As for F1 they could make that much cheaper too. They could go back to the studio in London for most of the non-European ones and one hours build up is a luxury anyway. A trade magazine can be got for those who want that. They also need an 80 % discount on what they are being charged. That's the only slim chance they have, IMO.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

BBC4 programs are good and as cheap as chips to make anyway. [They could scrap BBC3 tho']

As for F1 they could make that much cheaper too. They could go back to the studio in London for most of the non-European ones and one hours build up is a luxury anyway. A trade magazine can be got for those who want that. They also need an 80 % discount on what they are being charged. That's the only slim chance they have, IMO.

I like the fact they go to the circuit rather than remain in the sterile atmosphere of a studio, plus the build up is gives those people who don't read motorsport publications or go to motorsport specific web sites, good background information. I like what the BBC have done with their presentation and broadcasting of F1.

[jab]

I think Saward hits the nail on the head here. Considering how all the members of the BBC team and people in F1 immediately jumped to its defence, methinks they doth protest too much - it's a Murdoch tactical move but I doubt it's untrue

And I think people are missing the point for why Sky would pick F1 up. It's not necessarily to get people to watch it - more that it's killing the competition to their football. If they pinch the rights, they've got the main contender to Saturday/Sunday midday football under their control as well. It's essentially creating a Sky monopoly on sport

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by jab

I think Saward hits the nail on the head here. Considering how all the members of the BBC team and people in F1 immediately jumped to its defence, methinks they doth protest too much - it's a Murdoch tactical move but I doubt it's untrue

And I think people are missing the point for why Sky would pick F1 up. It's not necessarily to get people to watch it - more that it's killing the competition to their football. If they pinch the rights, they've got the main contender to Saturday/Sunday midday football under their control as well. It's essentially creating a Sky monopoly on sport

Like they don't have a virtual monopoly already; football, the US version of the game, cricket, both Rugby codes.

[Born Racer]

Originally Posted by rocketcar

Rediculous to axe f1 on the bbc, axe some of the rubish they show for the liberal left on bbc 4!

What do you mean? I know for example of plenty of good music documentaries on BBC4; those shows charting the history of a genre like blues or reggae using archive footage are fantastic (and probably cheap to make). duke_toaster also mentioned the brilliant Charlie Brooker.

I'd be happy to see the back of BBC3 personally. It seems to be trying to cater for a 'demographic' that it thinks exists and comes across as a bit IQ-insulting. But maybe many people like it, so who am I to say it shouldn't be there if a broad range of people pay the licence fee?

Formula 1 would be making a massive error getting off free-to-air. It simply isn't yet popular enough to the proverbial man in the street to be pulling such stunts. It shouldn't get so big for its boots. As for Sky- urgh.

[chillibowl]

a couple of questions.

1. is it £140.00 a year or a month? for HD coverage here an average subscriber pays well over $100.00 a month/$1,200 per year (albeit for a lot more channels but every increasingly owned by fewer companies so maybe more similar to the UK model than it used to be).

2. does the BBC show commercials during the race (either pause the action, cut away to commercial, or go to a split screen)?

i think no but not sure. we get commercials for everything and they cut away from the action to show them. its how broadcasters make money and its why they broadcast spots in the first place. comercials suck but its necessary to get it on TV so its win win.

[bella]

it's £140 for the year to view tv, though there is a discount for black and white tellys (!). and there's no adverts. which is amazing, frankly, and well worth paying the licence fee for alone before you even consider some of the programming.

[chillibowl]

thanks bella and yes, frankly, that is amazing!

actually with no advert breaks i think i understand the logic of FTA model even less.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by bella

it's £140 for the year to view tv, though there is a discount for black and white tellys (!). and there's no adverts. which is amazing, frankly, and well worth paying the licence fee for alone before you even consider some of the programming.

To be fair, that's for TV licence only, anyone who wants HD coverage has to pay extra for it via a monthly subscription to Sky or Virgin etc.

[duke_toaster]

Freesat HD and Freeview HD do not have any subscription and show BBC1 HD, BBC HD (more or less BBC2 HD), ITV1HD and Channel 4 HD.

[Andy77]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Freesat HD and Freeview HD do not have any subscription and show BBC1 HD, BBC HD (more or less BBC2 HD), ITV1HD and Channel 4 HD.

Yes, I can confirm this

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

What do you mean by a sunk cost?

TV in the UK isn't free to watch, you have to pay the licence fee before you can watch, ergo it's not free.

You have to pay the licence fee!
You have no choice no matter what is on.
So there is no extracost in watching racing on BBC.
If it goes to pay TV, then you are going to be hit for more money, plus the same BBC licence fee (the sunk cost).

Once you have paid your licence fee anything you want to watch that is actually given to you becomes free. You do not get a discount if there is nothing that you want to watch do you?

[Jamesy-18]

Maybe they'll finally invest in some proper racing then.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Freesat HD and Freeview HD do not have any subscription and show BBC1 HD, BBC HD (more or less BBC2 HD), ITV1HD and Channel 4 HD.

Freesat HD and Freeview HD are free?