• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Broadcasting
F1 Coverage - The Verdict: 2016 Season
<<
<
87 of 226
>>
>
clewsy
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by Hacker Harrier:
“Did ITV need F1 back?”

That is a good question. Maybe ITV felt that F1 needed them more than they needed F1? After all it was F1 who needs da new broadcaster to take on the rights and they were not ideal as it wasn't every race live any more.

F1 if you believed the media circuit was trying hard to get ITV to take it, but ITV didn't show the interest that was expected (price requested). Some suggested that it was team pressure which stopped it going to sky exclusively from 2016 onwards.
am1969
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by bobnick:
“Rather aggressive closing montage by Channel 4, clearly they aren't too happy about the Sky deal, or at least realise they have nothing to lose! Picking 'Freedom' as the song in Bahrain, then using the lyrics to suggest Bernie is the King and Jean is 'Dumb' ”

Don't know why Sky even bother with F1. All they care about is Football and Cricket. As for Bernie it's time to retire before the sport ends up where the Titanic was discovered. Some might say it is already there!
DanManF1
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“It's just at the end of the day C4 are a business and need to make money. I think most people would agree that commercially for them showing ads in the content is best for them. Just seems a strange decision to make and commercially one that c4 probably should review following how they have been treated following the sky deal.”

So just because of how they've been treated by Bernie, this means they should take it out on the viewers by forcing them to watch ads during the race? That doesn't seem very fair.
clewsy
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by DanManF1:
“So just because of how they've been treated by Bernie, this means they should take it out on the viewers by forcing them to watch ads during the race? That doesn't seem very fair.”

It's not taking it out, its doing what is commercially logical. Commercial TV gets paid for by adverts and advertisers want the best possible slots, so it's a no brainer from that point of view.

I think some peolem forget that the BBC only doesn't have adverts because you have to fork out a licence fee for it. That's why sky sports is a joke - take a sub's from you, then also carry adverts to make additional revenue.
Hacker Harrier
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by am1969:
“Don't know why Sky even bother with F1. All they care about is Football and Cricket. As for Bernie it's time to retire before the sport ends up where the Titanic was discovered. Some might say it is already there!”

BT Sport have spooked them.
BenFranklin
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“It's just at the end of the day C4 are a business and need to make money. I think most people would agree that commercially for them showing ads in the content is best for them. Just seems a strange decision to make and commercially one that c4 probably should review following how they have been treated following the sky deal.”

I'm sure C4 thank you for your concern but I think they know what they are doing.
DanManF1
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“It's not taking it out, its doing what is commercially logical. Commercial TV gets paid for by adverts and advertisers want the best possible slots, so it's a no brainer from that point of view.

I think some peolem forget that the BBC only doesn't have adverts because you have to fork out a licence fee for it. That's why sky sports is a joke - take a sub's from you, then also carry adverts to make additional revenue.”

"Hey, Channel 4 have started showing ads during the races purely because they're losing the rights in three years time, but that's okay, because it's commercially logical" is NOT the kind of reaction any viewer would have. They've promised the Channel 4 viewers uninterrupted race coverage. That's the bottom line.
BenFranklin
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“It's not taking it out, its doing what is commercially logical. Commercial TV gets paid for by adverts and advertisers want the best possible slots, so it's a no brainer from that point of view.”

And C4 would have calculated all this before taking the rights.
clewsy
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by DanManF1:
“"Hey, Channel 4 have started showing ads during the races purely because they're losing the rights in three years time, but that's okay, because it's commercially logical" is NOT the kind of reaction any viewer would have. They've promised the Channel 4 viewers uninterrupted race coverage. That's the bottom line.”

However does f1 attract many casuals. The majority of fans would just put up with it and watch. Some would moan, but still watch.

So commercially C4 make some £s off advertisers reaching that attractive male audience.
Hacker Harrier
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by BenFranklin:
“I'm sure C4 thank you for your concern but I think they know what they are doing.”

Bernie gave them the full loving embrace from 'the piranha club' on March 24th.
clewsy
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by BenFranklin:
“And C4 would have calculated all this before taking the rights.”

Correct. However different people come and go in organisations. Someone looking to maximise c4 revenues woukd be foolish not to take this obvious step.
Hacker Harrier
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“Some would moan.”

Every F1 forum on the web, ever.
DanManF1
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“However does f1 attract many casuals. The majority of fans would just put up with it and watch. Some would moan, but still watch.

So commercially C4 make some £s off advertisers reaching that attractive male audience.”

I see your point, but it's still not the right thing to do after all the press releases have promised uninterrupted coverage.

Why don't you pass on your message to C4, and if they suddenly throw in some adverts during their next live race, we'll be sure to give you the credit for it.
clewsy
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by Hacker Harrier:
“Every F1 forum on the web, ever.”

But they would still watch ...proving that advertising works. Hehe
clewsy
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by DanManF1:
“I see your point, but it's still not the right thing to do after all the press releases have promised uninterrupted coverage.

Why don't you pass on your message to C4, and if they suddenly throw in some adverts during their next live race, we'll be sure to give you the credit for it.”

I think I'd rather have it as it is. Frona viewing perspective its great. business perspective, seems a little strange.

I don't mind being able to watch the race then switch back off. Perfect viewing for me and many others. However thinking commercially, that isn't helping the c4 advertising coffers.
kriZbii
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“Correct. However different people come and go in organisations. Someone looking to maximise c4 revenues woukd be foolish not to take this obvious step.”

You're foolish to think they should.

Channel 4 got the rights for three seasons with the promise of no ads, they did the maths on it, decided to do it, there's no reason to undo it based on something that's happening after their rights end.

All they'd achieve is reducing their viewers for live races as anyone who already has Sky would opt for Sky's ad-free coverage instead, reducing Channel 4's audience and reducing the value of their advertising slots.
solarflare
03-04-2016
Was with friends and we watched the C4 coverage. Thought they did a good job for the most part, though there were quite a few times when they seemed drowned out by other sound from the track. DC and Webber work well together, Steve Jones is a bit odd at times with some of his comments and facial expressions but does an ok job of keeping it all together. Wolff a bit quite but still fairly interesting to listen to (and it must be odd for her when she is basically interviewing her husband! Interesting to see what that's like when Merc make a major screw up and get a grilling...).

The pre-race interview with Toto made us laugh with some puerile but funny innuendo. We also loved Jones' strangely blunt comment to Toto post-race (something along the lines of "Was 1-3 the best you could do?" "Yes" "No, I think you could have done better!").

Ben and DC were great to listen to.

Biggest complaint is they need to use Karun Chandhok more like how Sky use Ted during races. Karun was almost entirely ignored.

All in all, though, might just convert me to C4 in future, or at least watch them instead of Sky on more occasions.

Flicked back to Sky post-race in periods between adverts and thought C4 were still the better watch. Sky strangely weak in terms of punditry for the second race of the season.

Though did agree with Brundle's comments regarding team radio having become way too closed off - is there some sort of FOM policy of minimal broadcasting in addition to the actual rules? I can't believe that there isn't more "just general commenting/ranting by drivers" to listen to even if it's not the team telling them how to drive the car - e.g. e.g. Hamilton seemed totally silent on being taken out by Bottas.

Pretty good race overall, lots of overtaking (not all of it DRS), lots of different strategies unfolding in different ways and lots of unfamiliar cars and drivers getting lots of screentime. Shame we lost Vettel though, I think he might have pushed Rosberg very hard.

Think we might get 3 qualifying formats this season, because I can't imagine the aggregate time nonsense being proposed being any better accepted than the current nonsense.
clewsy
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by kriZbii:
“You're foolish to think they should.

Channel 4 got the rights for three seasons with the promise of no ads, they did the maths on it, decided to do it, there's no reason to undo it based on something that's happening after their rights end.

All they'd achieve is reducing their viewers for live races as anyone who already has Sky would opt for Sky's ad-free coverage instead, reducing Channel 4's audience and reducing the value of their advertising slots.”

I suspect most of the sky f1 viewers are loyal to sky f1? There can't be that many who switch it over to c4, as I suspect they become used to the "sky way" and makes sense every race weekend.

Viewer wise the sport probably has a set range, which probably wouldn't fluctulate the overall advertising rate that much. Remember this is a key market in advertising and currently ITV4 is the best outlet for many of these advertisers to reach a FTA audience on a regular occasion.

The fact they have decided not to do it is their choice. Still shouldnt stop us looking at it commercially as a very strange and uneconomical decision.
mlt11
03-04-2016
C4 isn't like ITV.

C4 is publicly owned - ie it's owned by the Government.

It is funded by advertising but it's objective isn't profit maximisation. It doesn't pay any dividends. All it is looking to do is break-even - any profit that might be made will only be reinvested into its broadcasting operation anyway.

So it's objectives aren't financial in the first place. All it is trying to do is generate enough revenue to make the programmes it wishes to make. One of which is to show F1 in the format to which it has agreed.
madmusician
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by mlt11:
“C4 isn't like ITV.

C4 is publicly owned - ie it's owned by the Government.

It is funded by advertising but it's objective isn't profit maximisation. It doesn't pay any dividends. All it is looking to do is break-even - any profit that might be made will only be reinvested into its broadcasting operation anyway.

So it's objectives aren't financial in the first place. All it is trying to do is generate enough revenue to make the programmes it wishes to make. One of which is to show F1 in the format to which it has agreed.”

...and in an environment in which C4 is being threatened with privatisation, it makes sense to demonstrate to the public the kind of thing that their public ownership can lead to - like ad-free coverage of live F1 races.

The structure of the half-and-half FTA/pay deal means that it is more economically viable (far more economically viable) for C4 to run live races ad-free. As pointed out up-thread, we still have ads in highlights races and for live race reruns. And it gives C4 some political leverage when it comes to discussion of privatisation. This is an example of a very tangible benefit of C4's ownership arrangements.
solarflare
03-04-2016
For anyone interested (they aren't) Martin Haven was on his own in the booth today for the WTCC round 1. Semi-regular co-comms Matt Neal was obviously in action at Brands Hatch, so presumably their other semi-regular go-to backup Harry Vaulkhard had somewhere better to be today.

As with most motorsports nowadays they've altered the format of the weekend again, so the reverse grid race was first up and then the "main race" with the actual grid based on quali was second up, and was (for reasons I can't really fathom) a whole extra one lap longer than the reverse grid one.
mjr
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“Correct. However different people come and go in organisations. Someone looking to maximise c4 revenues woukd be foolish not to take this obvious step.”

I bet it's not obvious though. You could entirely drive away the very viewers who would have watched the free practice, qualifying & pre/post-race show and consumed the adverts there.

Maybe even push away the exact demographic that would be targeted by the high-value ads for things like Mercedes and Microsoft Azure etc.

I doubt many with Sky as an option would watch C4 if they did in-race ads, whereas at the moment, quite a few Sky viewers (me included) watched C4 today.

In-race ads could easily take the net profit down.

As BenFranklin and others have said, Channel 4 will have calculated this.
popeye13
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by mlt11:
“C4 isn't like ITV.

C4 is publicly owned - ie it's owned by the Government.

It is funded by advertising but it's objective isn't profit maximisation. It doesn't pay any dividends. All it is looking to do is break-even - any profit that might be made will only be reinvested into its broadcasting operation anyway.

So it's objectives aren't financial in the first place. All it is trying to do is generate enough revenue to make the programmes it wishes to make. One of which is to show F1 in the format to which it has agreed.”

Its a not-for-profit broadcaster and does its job fantastically! I loved my time working for them and glad they had the stones to say no ads during the races live!
Why on earth a certain poster is obsessed with C4 showing ads is frankly beyond me and creating a sizeable shift in this thread for something that to me rather suspect in motive!

Flicking between C4 and Sky, i found C4 was the better in pre-race! Sky yet again needs a serious refresh. Same was the case and is with their football coverage. stale, old, same faces, nothing new, reliant on VT's and gimmicks with nothing of real substance!
Susie Wolff needs to speak up and Steve Jones might be the wrong man for the job but i will wait for a few more races before i drop that or carry it on!

As for the race itself, i thought it was a good one!
Shame Vettel blew up and double shame Bottas rammed Hamilton because seeing the 2 Merc's battle would have been fun and we were robbed of that plus seeing the Ferrari in there too!
But good racing up and down the grid, shame politics is killing the sport and arrogance from FOM and the FIA! Its one stream of shit after the next with FOM & FIA.
as for Bernie - Gimp!!
Ten_Ben
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by kriZbii:
“You're foolish to think they should.

Channel 4 got the rights for three seasons with the promise of no ads, they did the maths on it, decided to do it, there's no reason to undo it based on something that's happening after their rights end.

All they'd achieve is reducing their viewers for live races as anyone who already has Sky would opt for Sky's ad-free coverage instead, reducing Channel 4's audience and reducing the value of their advertising slots.”

Exactly. Don't forget as well that it's far, far easier for them to produce the live race without someone siting there constantly having to try to second-guess when there's a quiet period to slip some ads in. It's racing, it's unpredictable. Anything can happen at any time. Better to let the race flow, keep the viewers happy and avoid having to then explain after a break why the lead has changed, why someone's gone out or why we're suddenly watching a safety car. Remember that ITV got it *very* badly wrong several times and missed critical moments (okay, some would have been bad luck but how would they have known?). They also had ad-backlogs when the first half of a race was exciting and busy. No, it's far better for C4 to run ad-free as they've said they would, then there's absolutely no risk to their reputation and it keeps the viewers happy.

There's plenty of ads before and after. An hour and a half ad-free once a month isn't going to harm them for the reasons which other people have explained.
believethehype
03-04-2016
Originally Posted by DanielF:
“Two commentators who are passionate about the series (this works both for Addison and Harvey as well as Titchmarsh and Hyde).”

Titchmarsh is stepping down and only doing some races this season.

Originally Posted by dearmrman:
“Can't imagine who would have wanted it.”

BT

Originally Posted by dearmrman:
“Doubt it, not high profile enough to get new subscribers...especially to dedicate a whole Sunday afternoon for it.”

They were interested enough to try and get the rights from 2017 onwards. And they weren't the only ones. The championship obviously value being FTA.
<<
<
87 of 226
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map