Formula 1 F1 TV coverage thread

Discussion in 'Motorsport' started by DwightSchrute12, Jul 29, 2011.

  1. Famine

    Famine Administrator

    Messages:
    68,228
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    A friend of mine misses all the races because he can't justify a £145.50 TV Licence just for F1.
     
  2. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    While that is a fantastic moral standpoint your friend has took, surely in the big scope of things it cant make a difference to the beeb.
    The only thing I watch on the BBC is the F1 and Top Gear. I wouldn't have a problem for the licence fee to be scrapped and the BBC have to have adverts to foot the bills, at least then the quality of the programmes might improve on less channels as they wouldnt be able to afford to have their over inflated portfolio that they have at the moment.
     
  3. TommyWizard

    TommyWizard

    Messages:
    552
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Urrrg. Now we loose out on Indy Car becasue the BBC wants to save money. Thanks for that. I hate F1 with a passion, lost its touch YEARS ago.

    Now the motorsports I love are possibly at risk. All becasue they "need" to show the Qualifying and Race day for the F1. Baloney.

    Hopefully the Indy Car joins Premier Sports and Setanta so I can still catch that and the NASCAR.
     
  4. Famine

    Famine Administrator

    Messages:
    68,228
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I'm not wholly sure it's a moral standpoint - he views television as being largely pap and simply doesn't pay the £12 a month subscription fee when he can watch almost anything anybody else recommends on iPlayer or DVD. This means he doesn't get to watch live F1 very often, except at others' houses, because he can't justify the Licence fee.

    Ask him yourself. It's Venari.
     
  5. Sureboss

    Sureboss Premium

    Messages:
    15,308
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    He has plenty of play things to play with anyway.
     
  6. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    Television is total pap.:)

    On terrestial tv there is hardly anything I want to watch, F1 being the only reason for me watching BBC1 and now that is going (or half at least), there will be nothing apart from Top Gear for 6 hours a year that can justify the money that I pay for the licence fee to keep the BBC going. Most of the stuff that I watch is on sky, but unfortunately I have to have the TV licence to legally watch the programmes that I choose to watch.

    The mind boggles on the amount of celebrity/soapstar/wannabe/neverwillbe/come/do/singing/dancing/skiing/skating/knitting/atomsplitting/a/b/c/x/factor/gottalent/gotnotalent/jungle/outhouse* delete as applicable that is on tv, and even more incredible the amount of people that watch it, all its spin offs, and then phone in to vote, where the decision has already been made and that money is going straight in the coffers.

    And because of this, it's why the BBC want more programmes like celebrity arse wiping, as its easy cash.
     
  7. Famine

    Famine Administrator

    Messages:
    68,228
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    to the pockets of Ant & Dec who, despite being Executive Producers, apparently know nothing about all this fraud going on.

    Allegedly.
     
  8. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    Dont get me started on them two! I will have an inbox full of infractions otherwise!
     
  9. myelement

    myelement

    Messages:
    82
    I'm not sure that phone votes make much money. Relative to the production costs of one of those shows.

    The results are manipulated though.
     
  10. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    My point is the generic rubbish they serve up, and the way the masses rush to it. Im sure they make enough to keep it going.
     
  11. Lizard

    Lizard Premium

    Messages:
    15,977
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I wonder has FOTA had a say in this as surely they will get less viewers and therefore less sponsors.
     
  12. Alex.

    Alex. Premium

    Messages:
    8,833
    Location:
    England
    Right, first chance I've had to comment on all of this. First things first as my household already has the full sports package it doesn't affect my viewing at all. That said I am fairly confident the Sky coverage will be absolutely terrible compared to BBC, here's why:

    1. BBC has a history and therefore extensive knowledge of broadcasting the sport and paddock
    2. The presenters of BBC know the drivers and teams very well and have a great personal relationship, which Sky will not have.
    3. Sky's presenters of Tony Jardine and John Watson are nowhere near as good as DC, JH and EJ. I mean, Tony Jardine? Really? The best thing for Sky to do is get the coverage put it all on Sky Sports 1 and steal BBC's presenters and crew. Brundle and Kravitz included. Much like BBC did from ITV.

    Look at a prime example, Lee Mckenzie when interviewing drivers like Vettel, there is more than an interviewer to driver relationship there because the BBC are are so well respected at what they do. Someone like Georgie Thompson will have nothing on Lee. RBR aren't going to invite Sky for a filming day with their drivers, but they'd happily invite the BBC. Sky Sports have to get their ideas together pretty damn fast because they are relatively clueless compared to the guys we are used to.
     
  13. Peterram430

    Peterram430

    Messages:
    539
    We'll just have to wait to see how things pan out. If Brundle and DC stick with the BBC in commentary and they show extensive highlights (which to me means almost the full race with the boring moments cut out) which are broadcast a couple of hours after the race finishes it could be fine. I can live with using live timing, radio and twitter commentary for the crucial races that aren't broadcast live although inevitably after a while I'll get bored of this and wait for the highlights. If Sky buy out the commentators and the BBC only show short highlights it'll be pretty rubbish though and my interest in F1 will decrease a lot, which might not be so bad, I'll have more important stuff to concentrate on over the next few years anyway. The BBC were never going to continue showing all the races and I think this is possibly the best compromise to a bad situation. One thing's for sure is that I'll not be paying for Sky.
     
  14. Famine

    Famine Administrator

    Messages:
    68,228
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    FOTA's say will largely consist of "How much? Really? Neat."
     
  15. DrTrouserPlank

    DrTrouserPlank

    Messages:
    626
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    The viewing figures will plummet as a lot of countries outside of the UK rely on the BBC's in-house coverage of F1.

    Teams will get less sponsorship money once the big sponsors realise that no-one is seeing their adverts, but the deal is obviously that this loss to the teams will be offset by a greater share in the TV revenues generated from Sky, and FOTA clearly signed-off on this deal. Some of the statements being attributed to them about "clarifying points" I think is just them trying to extricate themselves from being called liars over their previous statements such as this from Whitmarsh,

    " It’s crucial to the commercial model of Formula 1 that TV coverage should remain free-to-air, and therefore universally accessible, and therefore widely consumed and enjoyed by large numbers of viewers – and the BBC delivers that in the UK.”

    and this from Whitmarsh..

    “Our current contracts require that F1 remain on free-to-air and the teams, through FOTA, are clearly going to safeguard their business interests and the interests of the fans in this regard.”

    and this from Whitmarsh..

    “All of the FOTA teams believe in free-to-air television.”

    I suppose this is all still true in a sense, but it's clearly not the message that these statements were originally intended to convey.
     
  16. myelement

    myelement

    Messages:
    82
    Seconded. I opted out whilst at uni by not having a TV. I didn't really miss much with the Internet, friends and the pub.
     
  17. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    I'm sure whitmarsh will change his opinion when he sees the SKY £££.
     
  18. Akira AC

    Akira AC

    Messages:
    4,366
    I cant pay the license, I just cant, way to expensive, and it gets worst on HD, I guess that I have to learn French now.
     
  19. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    I think ive seen a glimpse of the future.

    You would have though on the day that F1 was announced that it would be shown on Sky, that the media wheels would be straight into action, but it would appear not.

    On sky sports news that had a report saying that F1 would be on from next year, blah, blah, blah, the then just had the most generic interview with Lewis Hamilton where it was dumbed down about as far as it could be (we have a car and it goes round and round).

    Then they had a cheesy graphic showing the current drivers points and behind that they had a CGI grid which looked like it was produced on an Amiga, and to make it worse, it had the brawn car on it. So they really have their finger on the pulse.

    Quite pathetic really.
     
  20. myelement

    myelement

    Messages:
    82
    Yes it is marginally better than losing it altogether (some perspective, thanks), however it indicates The Beeb's priorities and eases the viewer into losing it altogether in a few seasons. Also, could cutting BBCF1's live team's season in half effect the quality of the coverage? Or lead to a mass exodus of staff to the dark side.
     
  21. skylinefx

    skylinefx

    Messages:
    865
    If all the current commentators stay with BBC (and I hope they do) and the extended coverage would be like the current 1 hour replay of the race in the evening +discussions then I'm kinda OK with it.
     
  22. myelement

    myelement

    Messages:
    82
  23. DrTrouserPlank

    DrTrouserPlank

    Messages:
    626
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I actually don't think it is. This deal represents worse value in my mind than the current deal in which they got slammed for wasting the company's money on something that was already on terrestrial. They might as well just have paid for F1 highlights which would have been a lot cheaper than this half-arsed deal they've shelled out for.

    The idea of watching half a racing season's championship is utterly ridiculous. You either follow it or you don't.

    As an alternative they should have opted to accept a deal to only show the first half of any live football matches; with Sky screening coverage of the second half. That probably would have been well received.

    What a load of tosh.
     
  24. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    As one of the comments has said.

    Why can't somebody just admit that you've spent far too much on the Olympics and something has to give.

    Ask yourself this - do you think 6 million people are going to watch the Olympic torch being carried across Britain for 70 days?

    I think you could have found the money from somewhere else.



    He is on to something, I wont be watching the olympics either.
     
  25. skylinefx

    skylinefx

    Messages:
    865
    They all got envelopes full of cash and been told to say that this is the best thing ever.
     
  26. Sureboss

    Sureboss Premium

    Messages:
    15,308
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Does he mean the BBC or the government? ;)

    I also won't be watching the Olympics. No interest at all in it.
     
  27. dhandeh

    dhandeh Premium

    Messages:
    11,315
    Location:
    England
    Well, im pretty sure the BBC has overstretched, probably the Government as well, so that leaves me and you to pick up the pieces, higher tax to pay for the olympics and no or reduced F1.

    Luckily for me (or unlucky) i'm getting married next July, the day the olympics start, then going to Turkey for 2 weeks to avoid it.
     
  28. Famine

    Famine Administrator

    Messages:
    68,228
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I'm currently planning on going on holiday to the USA for the entirety of the Olympics. There's 41 contiguous States I haven't been to yet and with a bit of luck the arse will fall out of the dollar soon and it'll be $2+ per pound...
     
  29. skylinefx

    skylinefx

    Messages:
    865
    http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/29072011/66/ecclestone-sky-grow-f1-audience.html

    Is he really that stupid?

    People who have Sky watch F1 on BBC.
    +
    People who don't have sky watch F1 on the BBC.
    =
    People currently watching F1.

    2012:
    People who will Sky will watch F1 on Sky.
    +
    People who don't have Sky will watch half of the season on the BBC and the highlights of the rest of the season.
    -
    People who will stop watching F1
    =
    People who will watch F1...

    How did he work out that the number of people watching will rise?
     
  30. Alex.

    Alex. Premium

    Messages:
    8,833
    Location:
    England
    We all know he's wrong bro.


    Seriously, Tony Jardine is not presenting my F1 coverage. It's not happening.