F1 goes to Sky sports

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by henners88

I can hope though, and hopefully the next scandal Murdock is involved in will destroy him and his seedy empire.

People like Murdoch don't get destroyed in scandals, they ride them out and pay off as appropriate.

[henners88]

Originally Posted by Mr V

People like Murdoch don't get destroyed in scandals, they ride them out and pay off as appropriate.

And people make them even richer by supporting corruption.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by henners88

And people make them even richer by supporting corruption.

Would that be me your refering to out of interest?

[henners88]

Originally Posted by Mr V

Would that be me your refering to out of interest?

Not you personally no, but anyone who pays out hundreds of pounds every year for their Sky TV packages. Some people are willing to pay for things they want to watch as they is no other option available and in doing so they line Mr Murdochs pockets.

[Mr V]

That would be me then. Fortunately only 39% goes in old Ruperts pockets

Trouble is, we can all be holier than thou, but we all do things that others would deem unacceptable, it's life - s**t happens and i for one won't apologise for it.

[Mr V]

My 5 year old has just had on Adventure Time and Johnny Test, that's it, F1 or not, Sky is being cancelled!!!!

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by henners88

And people make them even richer by supporting corruption.

I'm not all evil. I haven't bought a Ferrari because of Austria 2002.

[henners88]

I don't for a minute think any of you are evil people.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Mr V

Only 2 weeks ago, Sky announced quarterly profits of £295 (16% rise), now, i'm no Einstein, but they do that 3 more times this year and that's a healthy £1.18 billion. here

I'm sure, with, or without anymore subscribers, they can afford to foot the bill each year. Whether you like it or not my friend, i don't think it will fall flat on it's face because aslong as Bernie's seeing the green, i don't think he cares how many viewers there actually are.

They could afford it, but is it worth having F1 as a loss leader? If Sky don't make any money on it (and I think it might be touch and go - I don't think F1 supporters are quite as fanatical as footy supporter) then they will cancel it (unless the cancel clause is really prohibitive). Then where will Bernie go?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Ingsy

According to Jake Humphrey on Twitter (via the BBC F1 website) the India race got 7.2million viewers: "This weekend a peak audience of 7.2m people tuned into the first ever Indian Grand Prix. In TV terms those figures are the size of Everest."


Not quite sure how an audience that size can be overlooked and discounted, but the Beeb have managed it.

Never let a good story spoil the facts, how about we see the average viewer figures for the last twelve months not the peak of one event.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by JamesH

They could afford it, but is it worth having F1 as a loss leader? If Sky don't make any money on it (and I think it might be touch and go - I don't think F1 supporters are quite as fanatical as footy supporter) then they will cancel it (unless the cancel clause is really prohibitive). Then where will Bernie go?

But would Sky rather people not watching it/having the ability to watch it on their channel, or lose the viewers to a rival?

[alan1302]

Originally Posted by Ingsy

According to Jake Humphrey on Twitter (via the BBC F1 website) the India race got 7.2million viewers: "This weekend a peak audience of 7.2m people tuned into the first ever Indian Grand Prix. In TV terms those figures are the size of Everest."


Not quite sure how an audience that size can be overlooked and discounted, but the Beeb have managed it.

The BBC needs to save a lot of money and even though F1 is very popular it's also very expensive so they did a deal with Sky which meant they could still provide coverage of half the races live and the rest as highlights.

It's all because people are not willing to pay enough for their TV licence.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by alan1302

The BBC needs to save a lot of money and even though F1 is very popular it's also very expensive so they did a deal with Sky which meant they could still provide coverage of half the races live and the rest as highlights.

It's all because people are not willing to pay enough for their TV licence.

It's mainly due to the BBC overspending; paying their executives and stars way too much. Jonathan Ross was paid £7 million by the BBC. There was no justification for it and now they are having to cut back.

[alan1302]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It's mainly due to the BBC overspending; paying their executives and stars way too much. Jonathan Ross was paid £7 million by the BBC. There was no justification for it and now they are having to cut back.

Jonathan Ross was never paid £7 million - his production company was paid that money and that was for producing each episode, paying staff etc and not a simple £7 million for Jonathan Ross.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by alan1302

Jonathan Ross was never paid £7 million - his production company was paid that money and that was for producing each episode, paying staff etc and not a simple £7 million for Jonathan Ross.

That's how it was reported at the time. Either way it was excessive, as was the BBC's spending; somewhat akin to their New Labour masters.

[alan1302]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

That's how it was reported at the time. Either way it was excessive, as was the BBC's spending; somewhat akin to their New Labour masters.

Can't trust what you read - a lot of total rubbish out there unfortunately.

The F1 rights certainly were excessive - sadly.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by alan1302

Can't trust what you read - a lot of total rubbish out there unfortunately.

The F1 rights certainly were excessive - sadly.

The overspending, e.g. Jonathan Ross, happened round about 2006, prior to the BBC negotiating the return of F1 to it's screens, so it didn't really have the money for anything long term.

[VIVA GT]

But surely, Sky aren't so worried worried about the small number of subscribers they'll have for F1. The most important thing to them is to get it away from free to air transmission. (Monopoly isn't just a game you play with grandma at Christmas!)

[Flavio Galtieri]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

But surely, Sky aren't so worried worried about the small number of subscribers they'll have for F1. The most important thing to them is to get it away from free to air transmission. (Monopoly isn't just a game you play with grandma at Christmas!)

Absolutely right. It's just one small element in Murdoch's master plan to destroy the BBC, for political reasons. The BBC is far too "liberal" for his taste.

Remember, this is a man who is quite prepared to pay serving policemen. employ serving cabinet ministers as "columnists" and pay PI's to hack the phones of the parents of a murdered child.

He won't give a damn if nobody watches F1 on Sky, just so long as it's not being shown on the BBC. And the money he's paying is so little it won't even make a blip on his accounts.

[herowassenna]

Originally Posted by Mr V

People like Murdoch don't get destroyed in scandals, they ride them out and pay off as appropriate.

Murdoch is merely a puppet for corrupt government regimes. If you believe we live in a world of free-speech and choice, then you are sadly mistaken.

"People believe they have a choice when they vote during an election. You know what? You'll still end up with the government, what kind of choice is that?"
Bill Hicks

All TV is corrupt and merely shows what they want you to see. From the banality of the X Factor to real world events, they edit what you see. What we see in the UK is very different to what is seen in the Far East for example. Other than F1 and MotoGP, I don't watch TV. It doesn't entertain me, it doesn't educate me, it merely tells me what I should think.
The Senna movie proves how editing can re-write a story from a particular point of view.


Isn't it fascinating that conspiracy theories have become more prevalent with the internet, because people have always asked questions but always feared being ridiculed by others.
"Back and to the left, back and to the left..." Bill Hicks merely saying what countless observers have thought about JFK's assassination.
Even today, the US government will make documentaries to mis-direct us and prove their version of events.
I have had the misfortune, on days off, of catching Jeremy Kyle in the morning, the wife insists!!! It makes me despair that celebrity now isn't about talent, it's about getting on TV, and the standards of these people...
Has anyone ever seen Wall-e, the Pixar animation. Are we not heading towards a society whereby we'll be floating around on chairs, ordering food and basically being obese. Being told by the Overseer what to do, think etc

I'm angry at Bernies greed, then again he knows enough heads of state to be part of the corrupt regime too. I'm angry that the F1 teams have no backbone. Sport has died, consumerism is all that matters.
On another thread we speak about Tilke circuits all being similar in design. TV contributes to applauding mediocrity and I have had enough.
I have Freeview, and a HDD recorder which even now I can't be bothered to get up at stupid o'clock, I just watch it "live" when i turn the thing on. But like others have said, I have a day to go to museums with my daughters, or go for picnics etc, I can watch the race in the evening and if it is merely highlights, then so be it.
30 years on, we have returned to the Sunday Grandstand scenario, watch first 3 laps , then snooker, another few laps, then cricket, then maybe last 5 laps. In the evening the 40mins of highlights. Racing towards the future, hardly.

Anyway, guys and gals, I'm glad to share my time and views (!) with you, as we seem to be true fans of F1, not blinkered fanboys as on other sites that merely know how to spell profanities properly.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

The most important thing to them is to get it away from free to air transmission. (Monopoly isn't just a game you play with grandma at Christmas!)

im not sure that anyone really put it out there like this before....so now im confused.

generally i love News Corps' coverage of sports. i love the variety they offer particularly by offering international sports that no local provider will carry here.

but hearing it describe as basic monopolistic behaviour rather than any desire of theirs to provide me with more content or service makes me rethink my point of view on this. in all of this i have ignored/blocked out this aspect of their desire to cover F1.

very good point and forcing a bit of a rethink.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

but hearing it describe as basic monopolistic behaviour rather than any desire of theirs to provide me with more content or service makes me rethink my point of view on this. in all of this i have ignored/blocked out this aspect of their desire to cover F1.

F1 is hardly going to be SKY Sports 'Jewel in the Crown'. But you can stop it from being someone else's 'Jewel in the Crown'.

[herowassenna]

SKY sells advertising doesn't it? I ask because I have never watched any broadcast by Sky whatsoever.
Is their advertising revenue larger than their subscribers revenue?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by herowassenna

Murdoch is merely a puppet for corrupt government regimes. If you believe we live in a world of free-speech and choice, then you are sadly mistaken.

"People believe they have a choice when they vote during an election. You know what? You'll still end up with the government, what kind of choice is that?"
Bill Hicks

All TV is corrupt and merely shows what they want you to see. From the banality of the X Factor to real world events, they edit what you see. What we see in the UK is very different to what is seen in the Far East for example. Other than F1 and MotoGP, I don't watch TV. It doesn't entertain me, it doesn't educate me, it merely tells me what I should think.
The Senna movie proves how editing can re-write a story from a particular point of view.


Isn't it fascinating that conspiracy theories have become more prevalent with the internet, because people have always asked questions but always feared being ridiculed by others.
"Back and to the left, back and to the left..." Bill Hicks merely saying what countless observers have thought about JFK's assassination.
Even today, the US government will make documentaries to mis-direct us and prove their version of events.
I have had the misfortune, on days off, of catching Jeremy Kyle in the morning, the wife insists!!! It makes me despair that celebrity now isn't about talent, it's about getting on TV, and the standards of these people...
Has anyone ever seen Wall-e, the Pixar animation. Are we not heading towards a society whereby we'll be floating around on chairs, ordering food and basically being obese. Being told by the Overseer what to do, think etc

I'm angry at Bernies greed, then again he knows enough heads of state to be part of the corrupt regime too. I'm angry that the F1 teams have no backbone. Sport has died, consumerism is all that matters.
On another thread we speak about Tilke circuits all being similar in design. TV contributes to applauding mediocrity and I have had enough.
I have Freeview, and a HDD recorder which even now I can't be bothered to get up at stupid o'clock, I just watch it "live" when i turn the thing on. But like others have said, I have a day to go to museums with my daughters, or go for picnics etc, I can watch the race in the evening and if it is merely highlights, then so be it.
30 years on, we have returned to the Sunday Grandstand scenario, watch first 3 laps , then snooker, another few laps, then cricket, then maybe last 5 laps. In the evening the 40mins of highlights. Racing towards the future, hardly.

Anyway, guys and gals, I'm glad to share my time and views (!) with you, as we seem to be true fans of F1, not blinkered fanboys as on other sites that merely know how to spell profanities properly.

I don't see Murdoch as a puppet, that would mean he is controlled by these so called corrupt governments. I see him as an exploiter and manipulator, in order to expand his media empire. He uses these governments for his own ends by promising them unenviable support across the various media platforms, which he controls. Just look at how he switched his allegiance over here, from Conservative to Labour and back again.

I agree with you about TV contributing to appauling mediocrity but it's not just TV that contributes to it. The Cult of Mediocrirty has spread to popular music, resulting in diminishing sales, with record labels looking for the next banal act as everyone quickly loses interest in the previous act; forget about 3 album deals.

Mediocrity has also spread to motor sport. Just look at IndyCar. What was once a series that produced some of the best racing ever, up until 15 years ago, is a spec series on the verge of collapse.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I don't see Murdoch as a puppet, that would mean he is controlled by these so called corrupt governments. I see him as an exploiter and manipulator, in order to expand his media empire. He uses these governments for his own ends by promising them unenviable support across the various media platforms, which he controls. Just look at how he switched his allegiance over here, from Conservative to Labour and back again.

I agree with you about TV contributing to appauling mediocrity but it's not just TV that contributes to it. The Cult of Mediocrirty has spread to popular music, resulting in diminishing sales, with record labels looking for the next banal act as everyone quickly loses interest in the previous act; forget about 3 album deals.

Mediocrity has also spread to motor sport. Just look at IndyCar. What was once a series that produced some of the best racing ever, up until 15 years ago, is a spec series on the verge of collapse.

Spot on...