Sky Italy presented a typical F1 weekend schedule yesterday on their website, you can see it here: http://guidatv.sky.it/static/images/sevendays/content/SpecialeFormula1/tabella__big.jpg
Little differences between this and the UK counterpart: our version of the F1 Show will be on-air daily from thursday to sunday for 1 hour. All the sessions from GP2, Porsche Supercup, and F1 will be broadcasted live alongside Qualifying and Races from GP3. Live will also be the Drivers Press Conference, the Team Principals one (which apparently has been moved to saturday morning) and the Drivers Parade. Interesting to note a "F1 Legends" program, which probably will be the translated version of the UK program.
Will they also be showing any local support races too? Will all the sessions have commentary? Still sounds more like what Sky F1 UK should have been, and what it would need to be to persaude me to sign up.
"joining presenters Natalie Pinkham and Ted Kravitz"
Whether that is a permanent move, we shall see. If it is a permanent move:
a) has Georgie been dropped?
b) has someone else been dropped?
Judging from the fact that Georgie features heavily in the F1 Show promo I saw today, and the 2013 updated Sky Sports F1 website still lists her as the presenter of the F1 Show, I'd say she is just unavailable for Fridays show.
On another note, having read this thread all the time for the past few years, this may be the year that I finally decide to start posting in it! And straight away, the regulars aren't going to like me because, I have to say, I'm not really a fan of the mighty Ben Edwards.
Of course I meant SD - I feared 406 was going to be broadcasting a 3D transmission so as I haven't got a 3D TV I would have to watch in SD (whatever number that is).
Of course I meant SD - I feared 406 was going to be broadcasting a 3D transmission so as I haven't got a 3D TV I would have to watch in SD (whatever number that is).
I think it may be better put that 3D isn't HD - exactly. HD, SD and 3D are three different things. So just because it's in 3D it doesn't preclude SD or HD broadcasts. All three will be available, as 406 will always be HD/SD for whatever you've got (Sky swap the channel as appropriate), and there's a separate 3D channel. So whatever you can get normally is what you'll get for this one, it's just a bonus for those with 3D TVs, no change for the rest of us
Judging from the fact that Georgie features heavily in the F1 Show promo I saw today, and the 2013 updated Sky Sports F1 website still lists her as the presenter of the F1 Show, I'd say she is just unavailable for Fridays show.
On another note, having read this thread all the time for the past few years, this may be the year that I finally decide to start posting in it! And straight away, the regulars aren't going to like me because, I have to say, I'm not really a fan of the mighty Ben Edwards.
Booooooo!
No no, seriously, welcome, etc.
Now if you'd like to explain exactly why you have turned away from the riteous path of commentary lord then you'll be fully baptised....by fire.
What do you prefer in a commentator? Wild enthusiasm or statistic based fact dump?
No no, seriously, welcome, etc.
Now if you'd like to explain exactly why you have turned away from the riteous path of commentary lord then you'll be fully baptised....by fire.
What do you prefer in a commentator? Wild enthusiasm or statistic based fact dump?
I fully appreciate that he is good at what he does, but it's his voice I can't warm too. First heard him a couple of years ago when he was still on the BTCC on ITV and still couldn't get used to it the few races I watched the BBC coverage last season.
Interesting news from France this morning that Canal+ will have exclusive live F1 rights as of March - negotiations were reportedly swinging back to TF1 retaining them earlier this week.
Another country's FTA viewing of the sport bites the dust..
Interesting news from France this morning that Canal+ will have exclusive live F1 rights as of March - negotiations were reportedly swinging back to TF1 retaining them earlier this week.
Another country's FTA viewing of the sport bites the dust..
This is a very unpopular thing to say (don't the shoot the messenger) but the days of FTA viewing have lasted longer than many other premium sports, we've probably been quite lucky for it to last so long. I fully appreciate people saying their TV licence should cover it all so the BBC can stay FTA across all 20 races but I suspect if you totalled up the cost to broadcast vs the number of viewers vs the revenue raised from the TV licence there would be a shortfall.
I'm sure someone will come along to clarify that soon.
I'm not saying I disagree with FTA as a concept (I'd love that across all 20 races!!) but I do get the impression that some UK F1 fans have a sense of entitlement above their actual financial 'clout' so to speak. The types that never attend a race (irrespective of high ticket prices), never buy any form of merchandising, and expect their share of the household TV licence fee to cover all their viewing desires (every sessions live in HD, all the support races etc). Something was going to give in the end and it's always going to be the fans suffering. Bernie could probably do more to reduce costs but that's very unlikely, he had to be dragged to allow us to watch in HD, despite it being available for years prior.
F1 reduces the number of people who can watch the sport so the private equity firms can pay off their debts to the banks, it's a crazy way to run the commercial side of the sport.
F1 reduces the number of people who can watch the sport so the private equity firms can pay off their debts to the banks, it's a crazy way to run the commercial side of the sport.
Defo...It's an investment tool for CVC. I doubt that'll change while the current managment are in charge. Hence we get pathetic spending on increasing exposure, improving viewing experiences. It's all about taking money out the sport to the current lot. Anything they invest in takes away from their bottom line. Pure greed...
It is not greed, the free culture in life has gone, people have to pay to see most professional sports be it football, rugby, cricket, tennis, car racing, motorbike racing, boxing,horse racing, etc., so why do people think they should be able to see it fta on television. Watching sport on TV is not some godforsaken right, or a necessity for life, these sports are all run as a business, they want to make money and I do not blame them for that.
They make a lot of money from TV rights so TV companies put them on subscription to pay for it.
It is not greed, the free culture in life has gone, people have to pay to see most professional sports be it football, rugby, cricket, tennis, car racing, motorbike racing, boxing,horse racing, etc., so why do people think they should be able to see it fta on television. Watching sport on TV is not some godforsaken right, or a necessity for life, these sports are all run as a business, they want to make money and I do not blame them for that.
They make a lot of money from TV rights so TV companies put them on subscription to pay for it.
I personally accept the rational behind FTA disappearing, I do think though the reluctance to improve/increase things away from that (fan services, attending GP's etc, costs to circuits hosting GP's etc) is hindered by FOM's reluctance to take any money away from what they return to CVC and that element is 'greedy' so to speak.
I personally accept the rational behind FTA disappearing, I do think though the reluctance to improve/increase things away from that (fan services, attending GP's etc, costs to circuits hosting GP's etc) is hindered by FOM's reluctance to take any money away from what they return to CVC.
And in the meantime the move to Pay-tv will bring decreased viewership which will make entering the sport less attractive to sponsors - especially for the smaller teams.
Those teams have a harder and harder time keeping their heads above water and have to turn to inexperienced pay drivers who are not up to the job, make the team look bad and make it less attractive to sponsors...
It's not a very stable foundation for the future of the sport.
It is not greed, the free culture in life has gone, people have to pay to see most professional sports be it football, rugby, cricket, tennis, car racing, motorbike racing, boxing,horse racing, etc., so why do people think they should be able to see it fta on television. Watching sport on TV is not some godforsaken right, or a necessity for life, these sports are all run as a business, they want to make money and I do not blame them for that.
They make a lot of money from TV rights so TV companies put them on subscription to pay for it.
You seem to contradict yourself there by saying it isn't greed, but oh wait, they all want to make money. (fortunes)
if greed did not exist, everything would be free.
everyone would share.
everyone would offer services and resources.
F1 wouldn't rely on advertising. It would thrive on competition and a desire to push the limits of technology, to beat the competitors.
to better one's self.
I think there are too many greedy fingers at the top of the chain
It is not greed, the free culture in life has gone, people have to pay to see most professional sports be it football, rugby, cricket, tennis, car racing, motorbike racing, boxing,horse racing, etc., so why do people think they should be able to see it fta on television. Watching sport on TV is not some godforsaken right, or a necessity for life, these sports are all run as a business, they want to make money and I do not blame them for that.
They make a lot of money from TV rights so TV companies put them on subscription to pay for it.
You seem to be arguing against a straw man here, it is very hard to argue that the extra money FOM are raking in is being used for he good of the sport, a lot of it appears to be going straight out to service bank debts that the new owners of the sport, a private equity firm who appear to have added no value to said sport, took out to fund their acquisition.
It is not greed, the free culture in life has gone, people have to pay to see most professional sports be it football, rugby, cricket, tennis, car racing, motorbike racing, boxing,horse racing, etc., so why do people think they should be able to see it fta on television. Watching sport on TV is not some godforsaken right, or a necessity for life, these sports are all run as a business, they want to make money and I do not blame them for that.
They make a lot of money from TV rights so TV companies put them on subscription to pay for it.
And yet bands have to give albums away for free now, or at least sell them on a pay what you think it's worth basis
I have no desire to get into a rights and wrongs of Pay / FTA etc.
However I think it is worth noting that a deal like this Canal+ (and some others?) suggests that after at least some experience of Pay only in a main market (ie UK last year) the powers that be appear not to have been scared off from going Pay exclusively by the fall in viewing numbers.
If we go back a couple of years before the Sky UK deal it was always perceived wisdom that F1 would never go Pay only (in a main market) because the reduction in viewing figures would lead to too much sponsorship revenue being lost. Well it seems that they have tested the water and, whatever the rights and wrongs, they are willing to press ahead down this road.
But one question - to what extent is there a disconnect here? - ie team owners want to maximise their income (ie sponsorship + only some share of TV) whereas the likes of CVC are skewed much more heavily towards TV revenue - though presumably they get some sponsorship income too?
As I say - no point in debating rights and wrongs yet again as it's been done a million times already - just trying to work out what is driving (excuse pun!) what is actually happening.
There's a wider issue of greed brewing and it's detrimental effect to the sport:
The German GP organisers are looking likely to get a reduction in the circuit hosting fee, they had been touted as saying behind closed doors they'd rather just not put on the GP as it's a loss making event for them. Given F1's close association with Germany this isn't going to be allowed to happen, so Bernie could potentially lower their race hosting fee and turn into a worthwhile event for them. If other tracks start getting circuit fees reduced it won't be long before the likes of Silverstone, Montreal, Melbourne, Spa etc start piping up and saying why should they pay through the nose when others don't. F1 (well Bernie) has a love affair with rich oil states hosting races, they don't have the core fanbase that other places do, if they suddenly decide to pull out and the 'old world' tracks can't afford hosting fees something will have to give.
The sport just seems so self defeating at the moment, I was dismayed to learn that 'paid drivers' now only make up 36% of the grid (and that's assuming Perez and Grosjean take a salary). It's almost like he (Bernie) doesn't care as he'll be gone soon and would be quite happy to see it all collapse without him running the ship.
At least the racing's good, inspite of everything around the sport trying to ruin it!!
Comments
Will they also be showing any local support races too? Will all the sessions have commentary? Still sounds more like what Sky F1 UK should have been, and what it would need to be to persaude me to sign up.
2D is in HD.
Judging from the fact that Georgie features heavily in the F1 Show promo I saw today, and the 2013 updated Sky Sports F1 website still lists her as the presenter of the F1 Show, I'd say she is just unavailable for Fridays show.
On another note, having read this thread all the time for the past few years, this may be the year that I finally decide to start posting in it! And straight away, the regulars aren't going to like me because, I have to say, I'm not really a fan of the mighty Ben Edwards.
Of course I meant SD - I feared 406 was going to be broadcasting a 3D transmission so as I haven't got a 3D TV I would have to watch in SD (whatever number that is).
If you talk about Sky Italy, yes.
I think it may be better put that 3D isn't HD - exactly. HD, SD and 3D are three different things. So just because it's in 3D it doesn't preclude SD or HD broadcasts. All three will be available, as 406 will always be HD/SD for whatever you've got (Sky swap the channel as appropriate), and there's a separate 3D channel. So whatever you can get normally is what you'll get for this one, it's just a bonus for those with 3D TVs, no change for the rest of us
http://youtu.be/n2oIGeFZxxM
Eh ?- As was stated in that post giving teh details - it sounds pretty much identical to the coverage Sky F1 provides over here.
Booooooo!
No no, seriously, welcome, etc.
Now if you'd like to explain exactly why you have turned away from the riteous path of commentary lord then you'll be fully baptised....by fire.
What do you prefer in a commentator? Wild enthusiasm or statistic based fact dump?
I fully appreciate that he is good at what he does, but it's his voice I can't warm too. First heard him a couple of years ago when he was still on the BTCC on ITV and still couldn't get used to it the few races I watched the BBC coverage last season.
Another country's FTA viewing of the sport bites the dust..
This is a very unpopular thing to say (don't the shoot the messenger) but the days of FTA viewing have lasted longer than many other premium sports, we've probably been quite lucky for it to last so long. I fully appreciate people saying their TV licence should cover it all so the BBC can stay FTA across all 20 races but I suspect if you totalled up the cost to broadcast vs the number of viewers vs the revenue raised from the TV licence there would be a shortfall.
I'm sure someone will come along to clarify that soon.
I'm not saying I disagree with FTA as a concept (I'd love that across all 20 races!!) but I do get the impression that some UK F1 fans have a sense of entitlement above their actual financial 'clout' so to speak. The types that never attend a race (irrespective of high ticket prices), never buy any form of merchandising, and expect their share of the household TV licence fee to cover all their viewing desires (every sessions live in HD, all the support races etc). Something was going to give in the end and it's always going to be the fans suffering. Bernie could probably do more to reduce costs but that's very unlikely, he had to be dragged to allow us to watch in HD, despite it being available for years prior.
Defo...It's an investment tool for CVC. I doubt that'll change while the current managment are in charge. Hence we get pathetic spending on increasing exposure, improving viewing experiences. It's all about taking money out the sport to the current lot. Anything they invest in takes away from their bottom line. Pure greed...
They make a lot of money from TV rights so TV companies put them on subscription to pay for it.
I personally accept the rational behind FTA disappearing, I do think though the reluctance to improve/increase things away from that (fan services, attending GP's etc, costs to circuits hosting GP's etc) is hindered by FOM's reluctance to take any money away from what they return to CVC and that element is 'greedy' so to speak.
And in the meantime the move to Pay-tv will bring decreased viewership which will make entering the sport less attractive to sponsors - especially for the smaller teams.
Those teams have a harder and harder time keeping their heads above water and have to turn to inexperienced pay drivers who are not up to the job, make the team look bad and make it less attractive to sponsors...
It's not a very stable foundation for the future of the sport.
You seem to contradict yourself there by saying it isn't greed, but oh wait, they all want to make money. (fortunes)
if greed did not exist, everything would be free.
everyone would share.
everyone would offer services and resources.
F1 wouldn't rely on advertising. It would thrive on competition and a desire to push the limits of technology, to beat the competitors.
to better one's self.
I think there are too many greedy fingers at the top of the chain
You seem to be arguing against a straw man here, it is very hard to argue that the extra money FOM are raking in is being used for he good of the sport, a lot of it appears to be going straight out to service bank debts that the new owners of the sport, a private equity firm who appear to have added no value to said sport, took out to fund their acquisition.
And yet bands have to give albums away for free now, or at least sell them on a pay what you think it's worth basis
.........Hang on a mo, maybe there's an idea
However I think it is worth noting that a deal like this Canal+ (and some others?) suggests that after at least some experience of Pay only in a main market (ie UK last year) the powers that be appear not to have been scared off from going Pay exclusively by the fall in viewing numbers.
If we go back a couple of years before the Sky UK deal it was always perceived wisdom that F1 would never go Pay only (in a main market) because the reduction in viewing figures would lead to too much sponsorship revenue being lost. Well it seems that they have tested the water and, whatever the rights and wrongs, they are willing to press ahead down this road.
But one question - to what extent is there a disconnect here? - ie team owners want to maximise their income (ie sponsorship + only some share of TV) whereas the likes of CVC are skewed much more heavily towards TV revenue - though presumably they get some sponsorship income too?
As I say - no point in debating rights and wrongs yet again as it's been done a million times already - just trying to work out what is driving (excuse pun!) what is actually happening.
The German GP organisers are looking likely to get a reduction in the circuit hosting fee, they had been touted as saying behind closed doors they'd rather just not put on the GP as it's a loss making event for them. Given F1's close association with Germany this isn't going to be allowed to happen, so Bernie could potentially lower their race hosting fee and turn into a worthwhile event for them. If other tracks start getting circuit fees reduced it won't be long before the likes of Silverstone, Montreal, Melbourne, Spa etc start piping up and saying why should they pay through the nose when others don't. F1 (well Bernie) has a love affair with rich oil states hosting races, they don't have the core fanbase that other places do, if they suddenly decide to pull out and the 'old world' tracks can't afford hosting fees something will have to give.
The sport just seems so self defeating at the moment, I was dismayed to learn that 'paid drivers' now only make up 36% of the grid (and that's assuming Perez and Grosjean take a salary). It's almost like he (Bernie) doesn't care as he'll be gone soon and would be quite happy to see it all collapse without him running the ship.
At least the racing's good, inspite of everything around the sport trying to ruin it!!