Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

F1 Coverage - The Verdict: 2013 Season


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14-02-2013, 15:13
dansus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,962

Another country's FTA viewing of the sport bites the dust..
Wont be long before its Sky only here. Question to all, if you currently watch BBC's coverage only, will you pay up for Sky?
dansus is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 14-02-2013, 15:18
Elissa Richards
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,812
I have no desire to get into a rights and wrongs of Pay / FTA etc.

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?

.
It's a good point and I don't understand the motivation either, maybe someone like Joe Saward, or James Allen could be asked to write a peice explaining the motivations/desires of CVC in lieu of raising money. IIRC though CVC are looking to get out soon, they've got what they wanted and there's a lot of talk surrounding middle eastern investment groups. I've just finished reading an auto biography of Bernie (No Angel: The Secret Life of Bernie Ecclestone) and there's a lot of insight into the deal making going on behind closed doors. Well worth a look if you fancy depressing yourself with the shady goings on!

I kinda get the feelings the teams just put up and shut up as they get a lot of money from 'commerical ventures' and pay lipservice regarding FTA to placate fans.
Elissa Richards is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 15:26
dansus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,962
Paying for rights is one thing, broadcasters and circuits having to pay huge sums to service debts is another. If Max and Bernie weren't allowed to run riot with sports assets, we might not be in this situation. Team owners kept quiet because their pockets were being lined, now those same people are struggling to stay afloat and many have since gone bust.

Meanwhile Bernie got his fat payday and the viewers are expected to pay large sums to follow the sport. You would think the FIA would do something about it, but now have no say after Max signed off the rights for 100 years for next to nothing.
dansus is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 14-02-2013, 15:26
mlt11
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 14,871
Wont be long before its Sky only here.
I think we can be very confident BBC will see out their contract to 2018.

We don't know exactly what BBC is now paying but it must be around 15m per year for the rights + production costs. That is very, very good value when you look at the volume of content and viewing figures it gets.

There is no reason for the BBC to drop out early. All their major sports rights contracts are now in place for at least approx the next 4 years and they know their income so there isn't going to be a need to make extra unplanned cuts.
mlt11 is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 15:29
mlt11
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 14,871
I kinda get the feelings the teams just put up and shut up as they get a lot of money from 'commerical ventures' and pay lipservice regarding FTA to placate fans.
Yes, but presumably if the teams were overall losing out badly from the switch to Pay then they would make some noise.

ie: It's possible that going Pay is net positive for Bernie / CVC and net negative for the teams.

But if it was badly negative for the teams surely we would hear something?
mlt11 is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 15:32
BenFranklin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,079
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?
I believe 100% of trackside advertising/sponsorship goes to FOM (and therefore CVC). So I guess they take a hit if sponsors decide to decrease how much they pay based on lower viewing figures (not that we have any evidence that suggests this has happened yet).
BenFranklin is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 15:37
dansus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,962

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?
The teams get an increased rev share of CVC's income to compensate for the loss of eyeballs. That was a sticking point of the recent negotiations around the latest Concord, some hoped the teams would band together and take more control of the sport, maybe even buy it out and put the money back into the sport, reduce ticket prices and rights fees.

But as usual, they settled for a few extra quid and signed up. Think thats why Adam Parr resigned.
dansus is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 14-02-2013, 15:41
mlt11
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 14,871
The teams get an increased rev share of CVC's income to compensate for the loss of eyeballs. That was a sticking point of the recent negotiations around the latest Concord, some hoped the teams would band together and take more control of the sport, maybe even buy it out and put the money back into the sport, reduce ticket prices and rights fees.

But as usual, they settled for a few extra quid and signed up.
Many thanks. But the question is are they being fully compensated? ie are they net no worse off?
mlt11 is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 15:41
dansus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,962
I think we can be very confident BBC will see out their contract to 2018.
Thats what i mean, wont be long.

Plus if you think the economy is in a mess now, will be worse in a few years. Wouldnt be surprised if the pound is devalued again, which point you can forget the BBC stumping up for another contract.

Many thanks. But the question is are they being fully compensated? ie are they net no worse off?
Who knows, cant be that bad otherwise they wouldnt have signed up.
dansus is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 14-02-2013, 16:29
D.M.N.
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 27,456
Many thanks. But the question is are they being fully compensated? ie are they net no worse off?
Teams rarely release whether they are making profits or not, so I doubt we will ever know the answer to that question.
D.M.N. is online now  
Old 14-02-2013, 16:30
JackFoley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 594
For those asking:
yes, every session on Sky Italy will have commentary (and no commentary option)
yes, they seem to take the Sky Sports F1 model (and rightfully so) but improving it, like for instance staying live all day from the circuit (unlike Sky UK) with continuity studios between the events, the F1 Show (our version at least) live every day, the Drivers Parade live and so on. I hope Sky UK follows that road too pretty soon.
JackFoley is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 17:13
Jonpollak
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Whatever...
Posts: 1,801
And you get IndyCar !!!
I'd move to back to Italy yesterday if I could convince my ever so British loving wife.

Enjoying reading the posts from Elissa Richards !!!

Jp
Jonpollak is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 17:20
JackFoley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 594
And you get IndyCar !!!
I'd move to back to Italy yesterday if I could convince my ever so British loving wife.

Enjoying reading the posts from Elissa Richards !!!

Jp
And MotoGP from 2014.
JackFoley is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 17:42
chrisf1fan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 51
Sky's live coverage of day 4 of the Barcelona test is currently scheduled to start at 13.00 and finish at 15.55, 5 minutes before the test finishes, hope this is a mistake.
chrisf1fan is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 17:49
mlt11
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 14,871
Sky's live coverage of day 4 of the Barcelona test is currently scheduled to start at 13.00 and finish at 15.55, 5 minutes before the test finishes, hope this is a mistake.
Sky's live programme runs from 2pm to 4.30pm on Thur, Fri and Sat and then 1pm to 3.55pm on Sun.

Is it just that the Sun session starts and finishes earlier?
mlt11 is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 17:54
chrisf1fan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 51
Sky's live programme runs from 2pm to 4.30pm on Thur, Fri and Sat and then 1pm to 3.55pm on Sun.

Is it just that the Sun session starts and finishes earlier?
No, my guess is because live football starts at 15:55 on sky 3D, though why they can't just continue on Sky Sports F1, I don't know.
chrisf1fan is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 18:07
RedSnapper
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 773
I have never really understood the much mentioned "loss of advertising revenue" that is mentioned about the switch to Sky in this country.

There is no advertising on the BBC - so the switch to Sky - if anyhting, had the potential to gain advertisers because of the increased platform. The on car/trackside advertising is a global thing - not exclusively for British viewers and still gets exposure via the BBC anyway via replay on its taped races.

Anyone care to point out where I am wrong on this ?
RedSnapper is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 18:09
F1Ken
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Of What??
Posts: 3,793
I think we can be very confident BBC will see out their contract to 2018.

We don't know exactly what BBC is now paying but it must be around 15m per year for the rights + production costs. That is very, very good value when you look at the volume of content and viewing figures it gets.

There is no reason for the BBC to drop out early. All their major sports rights contracts are now in place for at least approx the next 4 years and they know their income so there isn't going to be a need to make extra unplanned cuts.
Agreed they will not let more go. I think us F1 fans have seen the pain. after 2018? As I don't have sky it could be the end for me. They will not get me !!! NEVER!

Okay a overreaction there but I just wouldn't pay. For the same reason I stopped going to races.

Ken
F1Ken is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 18:24
ariusuk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 12,986
Sky's live programme runs from 2pm to 4.30pm on Thur, Fri and Sat and then 1pm to 3.55pm on Sun.

Is it just that the Sun session starts and finishes earlier?
No, my guess is because live football starts at 15:55 on sky 3D, though why they can't just continue on Sky Sports F1, I don't know.
Generally teams tend to stop running before the session ends on the final day. They just want to pack up and go home.
ariusuk is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 19:00
mlt11
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 14,871
I have never really understood the much mentioned "loss of advertising revenue" that is mentioned about the switch to Sky in this country.

There is no advertising on the BBC - so the switch to Sky - if anyhting, had the potential to gain advertisers because of the increased platform. The on car/trackside advertising is a global thing - not exclusively for British viewers and still gets exposure via the BBC anyway via replay on its taped races.

Anyone care to point out where I am wrong on this ?
The advertising earned by Sky will go to Sky - not anyone in F1.

The issue is the potential loss of on car/trackside advertising/sponsorship - of course this is a global thing and the UK is only a small part. But the UK is a significant market and the point about Canal+ is that France is also a significant market and it suggests they are happy doing Pay only deals which will reduce overall audiences. Of course this is mitigated to some degree by FTA highlights but not fully.
mlt11 is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 19:25
dansus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,962

Anyone care to point out where I am wrong on this ?
Fewer eyeballs seeing the logo, means less value to a sponsor.
dansus is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 14-02-2013, 19:31
D.M.N.
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 27,456
I do hope Sky have some kind of contingency plan if the last test is a washout....
D.M.N. is online now  
Old 14-02-2013, 19:34
RedSnapper
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 773
The advertising earned by Sky will go to Sky - not anyone in F1.

.
but adverts drive more sales (the reason they do them) so an additional platform for advertising should in theory generate more interest from sponsors to F1...
RedSnapper is offline  
Old 14-02-2013, 19:35
R410
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Guisborough, North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,880
Wont be long before its Sky only here. Question to all, if you currently watch BBC's coverage only, will you pay up for Sky?
I wonder how many will be prepared to, because it is very unlikely the HD package availability will last that long.

I have never really understood the much mentioned "loss of advertising revenue" that is mentioned about the switch to Sky in this country.

There is no advertising on the BBC - so the switch to Sky - if anyhting, had the potential to gain advertisers because of the increased platform. The on car/trackside advertising is a global thing - not exclusively for British viewers and still gets exposure via the BBC anyway via replay on its taped races.

Anyone care to point out where I am wrong on this ?
Sponsorship of the teams, not the broadcaster. The sponsors like GE and Airbus.

Quite why you got mixed up I do not know.
Sponsorship of Sky Sports F1 in tiny in comparison to the sponsors involved in F1.

Fewer eyeballs seeing the logo, means less value to a sponsor.
And then less money they are prepared to offer in sponsorship. Which will affect the smaller teams the most.
R410 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 14-02-2013, 19:38
R410
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Guisborough, North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,880
but adverts drive more sales (the reason they do them) so an additional platform for advertising should in theory generate more interest from sponsors to F1...
Additional platform?

Any sponsors involved in F1 already pay money to advertise to every country that can receive F1, why would they then pay more money to a broadcaster to advertise to just one country?
R410 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
 
Closed Thread



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:07.