F1 goes to Sky sports

[Tal Aras]

This could be Bernie using Sky to put a squeeze on the teams, along the line of:

1) Races only on Sky have poor viewing figures
2) Sponsors complain to teams about poor viewing figures in a key market
3) Teams complain to Bernie
4) Bernie says BBC can't afford the full season and I can't reduce the charge to them, unless you are willing to accept less money
5) Teams agree. BBC pays less and Bernie pockets the difference (Sky having realised they aren't making money and quit)

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by jab

It won't matter, though. You could get a quarter of the viewers that is currently expected on Sky and they'll still do well out of it. The only way it could go wrong is if only one man and his dog watches, which isn't going to happen - F1 fans are far too loyal

Sky Sports is sold as a separate package and includes all 4 sports channels, so the only way this would go wrong is if F1 was sold as an add on to Sky Sports but it won't be.

[bella]

Originally Posted by Mr V

His entire piece had one single paragraph on Sky..............

Sky has done wonderful things with cricket and football, it offers incredible depth of the sports it covers and has already signalled its intention to take the sport to new levels. We'll see how a sport that is so dependent on big TV audiences will react to the news of partly non-free-to-air F1 coverage.

And i, personally, can't see anything other than the truth in his statement.

got to agree with that actually. the move to sky might not suit the vast majority of anything but devoted fans, but they have done good things for cricket. the money they pay for the rights does actually reach the grass roots though, whereas the idea of that happening in f1 is totally hilarious.

arguably they've helped contribute to the ridiculous money situation football is in now, though.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by neiltb

the beeb could cut down to the speed (fox) standard, send a pit reporter, will buxton?, and have the other 3 idiots in the studio in north carolina gleaning the international feed for info.

How are David Hobbs, Bob Varsha, and Steve Matchett idiots?

I'd love to hear this one.

[Paradise City]

There was an inevitability to something like this although I'd lay bets that CH5 would've got the gig with an 'each way' bet for CH4. I don't even have CH5. Yet Bernie blind sided me with this Sky.

Blame? Extortion Eccelstone. He was charging loony prices (IMO, 20/40 times above their worth) for TV rights like he does with the tracks and when the belts tightened, pure chaos.

I have Sky. Doesn't impact upon me and the promise of bells and whilstles, no adverts coverage isn't bad as long as they put the right commentators in and the BBC still show ten races.

I am concerned for the sport though. I suppose it was some magic trick for F1 to be the last sports to go behind the iron wall of Sky Sports rather than one of the first ones.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by Steve Fox

We can't even vote with our feet and not pay the license fee, Democracy anyone?

You can do nothing, zippo, rien de tout ! The BBC is a dictatorship and always has been. It's a ridiculous outrage.

The BBC have no concept of the word efficiency or competition. If their obesity was personified, they would be cutting off a limb to loose weight rather than going on a diet.

They pay themselves huge amounts of money - how about they pay themselves less ?
Staff have gilt edged 'public service' pensions - how about they move them all to private personal pensions just like the rest of us.
They have one of the world's largest content rich websites - why are UK licence payers funding the education of the rest of the world.
They've spent money on buildings like its going out of fashion... they've just undertaken a ridiculous relocation exercise from London to Manchester 'for the hell of it'.

People get very touchy when reform of the BBC is mentioned but the time has got to come when this craziness is brought to a halt and the entity is accountable for what it consumes.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by jab

People have short memories. When people see how good the coverage is, they'll forget ever having said they'll never subscribe

The only people that lose out here when it all pans out will be those who genuinely can't afford it

No they won't. I certainly won't subscribe to Sky (and I can easily afford it), just because F1 is on it. And to be honest, the BBC coverage is as good as it needs to be for me to watch it. Sky would have to pay me for the coverage to be so good for me to watch it there!

I'm not sure how much it costs for the BBC to actually send people out to the races. JH, MB, DC, the pitlane womans who's name I cannot remember, plus small camera crew. Not outrageous. The majority of the cost to the BBC is paying for the feed from FOM. The BBC also do a lot of stuff on the Red button, which, to be honest, I don't bother with, and on iPlayer, which I do watch, but that's no different from any other iPlayer stuff, so no addition cost except FOM license charges.

So really, the 'good coverage' isn't really that much of the cost. So how much better could Sky be? They will use the same feeds, just have their own version of the current presenters.

So, in effect viewers will get the same view of the action, with different presenters, but at 4 times the cost we pay at the moment. (Licence fee = £145.50, Sky Sports = £600 according to posts here)

Sounds like a good deal to me.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by JamesH

Of course you can vote with your feet. Get rid of your telly, no need to pay the licence fee. Simple.

Oh, hold on, you want to keep your telly? Because you watch stuff on it? That isn't F1?

okkkkaaayyyy.....

Point being, the license fee covers a lot of stuff, F1 is just a minor (but expensive) part of it.

I have to pay the BBC money whether I watch their channels or not, whether I agree with what they do with that money or not. I have to pay the BBC because I have a TV receiver. That's not democratic. That's dictatorial.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

no adverts coverage isn't bad as long as they put the right commentators in

My initial concern was the adverts but then i remembered that Sky didn't put the adverts in back in 2002, although that was pay per view. Hopefully they will bring back Ben Edwards, like in 2002, but leave John Watson out of it.

[Paradise City]

I don't particularily blame the BBC. Not that I don't agree with some of the criticisms of the BBC but public broadcasters today are always looking over their shoulders to justify themselves from politicians and others and sometimes make funny decisions to keep that lot off their back. Money is scarce afterall and crazy prizes Eccelstone isn't cheap.

That's the nature of public broadcasting more or less anywhere

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by JamesH

No they won't. I certainly won't subscribe to Sky (and I can easily afford it), just because F1 is on it. And to be honest, the BBC coverage is as good as it needs to be for me to watch it. Sky would have to pay me for the coverage to be so good for me to watch it there!

I'm not sure how much it costs for the BBC to actually send people out to the races. JH, MB, DC, the pitlane womans who's name I cannot remember, plus small camera crew. Not outrageous. The majority of the cost to the BBC is paying for the feed from FOM. The BBC also do a lot of stuff on the Red button, which, to be honest, I don't bother with, and on iPlayer, which I do watch, but that's no different from any other iPlayer stuff, so no addition cost except FOM license charges.

So really, the 'good coverage' isn't really that much of the cost. So how much better could Sky be? They will use the same feeds, just have their own version of the current presenters.

So, in effect viewers will get the same view of the action, with different presenters, but at 4 times the cost we pay at the moment. (Licence fee = £145.50, Sky Sports = £600 according to posts here)

Sounds like a good deal to me.

Ahem... GBP745.50 ! You still need to pay the licence fee even if you only watch Sky.

[wheadon]

"Today has been a landmark day for Formula One as it will be transmitted for the first time by Sky Sports from 2012."

Hasn't Formula One already been on Sky a few years back? I think it was PPV but still on Sky!

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by bella

got to agree with that actually. the move to sky might not suit the vast majority of anything but devoted fans, but they have done good things for cricket. the money they pay for the rights does actually reach the grass roots though, whereas the idea of that happening in f1 is totally hilarious..

Of course it will get to the grass roots. You know, the one's in Bernie's pockets? That's where the grass roots of F1 are. Nestling next to BE's fetid gonads.

[Jamesy-18]

Well, that's my run of watching every race of the year screwed then. No way I'm paying for Sky. If I bought it, that is the only thing I'd watch, and it's not worth it, despite being a Formula One fan from a very young age. Besides, it'll probably get second-rate coverage to some footbore match somewhere anyway, knowing Sky.

Just as everything was going so well. Great commentary team, brilliant pre and post quali and race shows, good racing, highest viewing figures in 10 years...this happens. Madness. Utter madness.

I hope someone involved in Formula One somewhere reads this thread, and the many like it all over motorsport message boards on the internet, and kicks themselves really hard. Because Formula One has just been screwed over in the UK. Well done Bernie. Well bloody done.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by davyboy

I have to pay the BBC money whether I watch their channels or not, whether I agree with what they do with that money or not. I have to pay the BBC because I have a TV receiver. That's not democratic. That's dictatorial.

For that you should blame the government, not the BBC.

Although the license is for live broadcast only I believe. You can have a telly without the license fee.

TBH, I think £145.45 per year is an acceptable amount for the service I receive.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by davyboy

Ahem... GBP745.50 ! You still need to pay the licence fee even if you only watch Sky.

My mistake.

Remember, it's a TV license fee, not a BBC license fee.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Jamesy-18

I hope someone involved in Formula One somewhere reads this thread, and the many like it all over motorsport message boards on the internet, and kicks themselves really hard. Because Formula One has just been screwed over in the UK. Well done Bernie. Well bloody done.

I just e-mailed Barbara Slater with a link to this thread and I got an 'out of office' reply. However, I don't think we'll get much truck from her, listening to her being interviewed reminds me of those New Labour Aparatchiks and the BBC is still riddled with them. You can watch it here.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/9550930.stm

[BertMk2]

Originally Posted by Barbara Slater

With this new deal not only have we delivered significant savings but we have also ensured that through our live and extended highlights coverage all the action continues to be available to licence-fee payers.

Well that's clearly a load of ******** isn't it? "all the action continues to be available" - so "highlights", "no live practice or qualifying" on non-bbc weekends is "all the action" is it? It's not really a question of if she can **** off, more a case of how far.

[bjohnsonsmith]

This is the reply I got to my e-mail to Barbara Slater:

"If you are writing with regards to the recent Formula 1 announcements, please note that you must go through the official BBC complaints process via www.bbc.co.uk/complaints as BBC Sport are unable to respond to personal email addresses on this occasion."

Typical BBC obfuscation.

[jab]

Originally Posted by JamesH

No they won't. I certainly won't subscribe to Sky (and I can easily afford it), just because F1 is on it. And to be honest, the BBC coverage is as good as it needs to be for me to watch it. Sky would have to pay me for the coverage to be so good for me to watch it there!

Who's to say the Beeb will continue the current level of coverage for the races they do have? If they suddenly were to go all ITV on us, I can see plenty of people crawling back to Sky. It may not cost much to do what they do on a race weekend but this isn't so much about the cost saving as it is the face saving. I wouldn't be surprised if the Beeb went back to hosting the show out of a broom cupboard in Salford for their races

[Delenn]

The BBC Sports Editors blog is up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/sportedit...red_betwe.html

I suggest you all complain there.

[Fox89]

If Brundle/DC get commentary contracts with Sky, AND the quality is really good, I might get it. But without that I won't be. Sky Sports is bloody expensive over the course of a year, and just to watch F1? Not a chance.

I've seen people liken it to the Premier League and 'you get what you pay for'. Well how much football do you get for your money? Multiple matches every week in the EPL, plus various cups and other games. What do you get for your money if you're a motorsport fan? 20 live races plus some 6AM highlight shows.

ANd how much is Sky Sports per year? £300? £600? I've heard those numbered floating around... and all to watch two races per month. No way.

[bella]

Originally Posted by Fox89

ANd how much is Sky Sports per year? £300? £600? I've heard those numbered floating around... and all to watch two races per month. No way.

it really is £600 a year for new customers. to add the sports pack to an existing basic contract is £243 a year.

http://www.sky.com/quickbuy/build

[Pingguest]

I have the feeling this is the end of Formula 1 in the UK. To me it sounds very unlikely the common man will subscribe to Sky to watch half of the season live.

Meanwhile, from next year I'll have to return to the Dutch commentary. Something I don't look forward to. Quite the opposite.

[Jamesy-18]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I just e-mailed Barbara Slater with a link to this thread and I got an 'out of office' reply. However, I don't think we'll get much truck from her, listening to her being interviewed reminds me of those New Labour Aparatchiks and the BBC is still riddled with them. You can watch it here.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/9550930.stm

"We have to be flexible and adaptable, we're operating in a very tough financial climate blah blah."

Well get rid of some of the other sh*t cluttering the BBC at the moment? Why not flog something like the dead horse that is Eastenders off to Sky? Or get rid of BBC3 and 4 - channels that have rubbish viewing figures, but take up a very high proportion of the BBC's budget?

If I was in charge of the BBC, I wouldn't find it hard to cut costs to keep F1! :P