BBC to pull out of F1 entirely.
Discussion
London424 said:
Have you guys got any stats to back this up as there are relatively few sports shown on a free to air anymore anyway. All those pay tv sports seem to be thriving.
I can happily say I have no stats, just opinion, hence my comment that it would be interesting to know the audience profile.However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
Chrisgr31 said:
London424 said:
Have you guys got any stats to back this up as there are relatively few sports shown on a free to air anymore anyway. All those pay tv sports seem to be thriving.
I can happily say I have no stats, just opinion, hence my comment that it would be interesting to know the audience profile.However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
Chrisgr31 said:
London424 said:
Have you guys got any stats to back this up as there are relatively few sports shown on a free to air anymore anyway. All those pay tv sports seem to be thriving.
I can happily say I have no stats, just opinion, hence my comment that it would be interesting to know the audience profile.However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
Two of the ways of financing F1 are sponsorship and the selling of rights. Whilst it is not the only way, sponsors generally want exposure to their target audience and, to an extent, to people outside that group. It is not correct just to suggest the higher figures the better, but unless your target would not dream of watching free to air TV, then what you want is FTA. Asking your audience to pay for your adverts is not normally a good idea.
Premiership football has had an historically large audience int he UK. It is the nattional sport. So limiting it to PPV makes a certain sense as the target audience will go to clubs, pubs, friends and other places to watch the broadcast.
Selling rights is another way of financing the sport. With the additional funding a sport organisation can use the money for other forms of advertising, or perhaps to invest in infrastructure to attract supporters/players. In the case of 'my' sport, there is a slightly different situation. There are a number of high level FTA matches so the lack of premiership matches going FTA is not such a problem.
F1, however, is just a little different in that the money goes to a private company, one which has a massive loan to pay off, if the press reports are to be believed. F1 is likely to suffer if it goes entirely PPV on Sky. I know of no pub that shows F1 in a large room.
Who/whatever buys the rights will, one assumes, still have debts to service and there seems little chance that the TV money will find its way to the sport.
Premiership football has had an historically large audience int he UK. It is the nattional sport. So limiting it to PPV makes a certain sense as the target audience will go to clubs, pubs, friends and other places to watch the broadcast.
Selling rights is another way of financing the sport. With the additional funding a sport organisation can use the money for other forms of advertising, or perhaps to invest in infrastructure to attract supporters/players. In the case of 'my' sport, there is a slightly different situation. There are a number of high level FTA matches so the lack of premiership matches going FTA is not such a problem.
F1, however, is just a little different in that the money goes to a private company, one which has a massive loan to pay off, if the press reports are to be believed. F1 is likely to suffer if it goes entirely PPV on Sky. I know of no pub that shows F1 in a large room.
Who/whatever buys the rights will, one assumes, still have debts to service and there seems little chance that the TV money will find its way to the sport.
markcoznottz said:
Chrisgr31 said:
London424 said:
Have you guys got any stats to back this up as there are relatively few sports shown on a free to air anymore anyway. All those pay tv sports seem to be thriving.
I can happily say I have no stats, just opinion, hence my comment that it would be interesting to know the audience profile.However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
There were many sports I wasn't that interested in when I was a yoof back in the 70's, but some of the stars of those sports were household names because of the exposure of many different sports on a regular basis via Grandstand/World of Sport on a Saturday...let alone the coverage of the main sports (other than football)
Boxing and cricket have rightly been cited as prime examples. Ali wouldn't have become the world superstar without FTA TV.
Most under 30's I work with are even interested in sport - a stark contrast to 30 years ago when the subject of conversation in work the next day (especially on a Monday) was 'did you see XYZ' over the weekend. And that included F1 races, even among those not especially interested in F1 or motorsport, but with the demise of live BBC/ITV coverage of all races, so I have noticed has been the demise of those Monday work 'did you see' conversations about F1.
Pay TV turns championships, with the exception of football, into ghettos. It's short term financial gain for the promoters, at the cost of national recognition and becoming part of the social tapestry.
When we were distributing a popular championship series, we were very careful to have at least two windows in most territories. It required plenty of work and commitment, but was a long term view.
Having both PPV and terrestrial coverage meant everybody won, with characters becoming household names and a career well beyond hanging up their boots and gloves, which obviously tends to be quite young in high impact sports.
When we were distributing a popular championship series, we were very careful to have at least two windows in most territories. It required plenty of work and commitment, but was a long term view.
Having both PPV and terrestrial coverage meant everybody won, with characters becoming household names and a career well beyond hanging up their boots and gloves, which obviously tends to be quite young in high impact sports.
Gaz. said:
Chrisgr31 said:
I can happily say I have no stats, just opinion, hence my comment that it would be interesting to know the audience profile.
However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
Both BTCC and WRC are on ITV4 which is free to air, with the BTCC meets shown live in their entirety for about 6 hours including support races. WRC dying on it's arse is down to a multitude of factors, mostly because it's utterly crap.However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
Regarding boxing- it's been mainly PPV for 30 years with the odd exception like the Eubank fights that HBO & ESPN didn't want to pay for. All of the big Tyson fights were PPV, all of Prince Naseem's & Lennox Lewis's big ones were PPV. Mayweather's fights are all PPV. Boxing is in the back pages of most newspapers on most days. David Haye was a regular fixture in the papers when he moved up to heavyweight until he retired a few years ago, infact at one point the sports pages were dominated by just him and Louis Suarez.
Golf- the sport has been dying for 10+ years at club level, the USPGA & European tours have never been shown on FTA tv in this country, just the 4 majors which only in the last few years have started to lose the Thursday or Friday or as of next year the entire event so the move to PPV cannot be blamed on golf's decline. If you're going to point fingers then you may want to start with the pedantic rules, the amount of rules, the dress codes and conventions- the under 40's just cannot be arsed when the R&A do their very best to suck the enjoyment out of it. The pensioners might like the tradition, stuffiness & culture but they will soon be dead or immobile.
Falling TV audience figures is in the minds of every single sport and long lived tv programme simply because 27 million homes now have more choice, it is is as simple as that. In the 1970s there were 3 channels, in the 1980s there were 4 channels. 85% of the country can receive at least 15 channels via a freeview set top box, 98% can get at least 70 channels via freesat as of March 2015. You have the same number of homes with a wider choice which in turn means lower figures for every show on TV, decade on decade.
Graham Hill, Jacky Stewart and Jim Clark were household names in the 1960s- yet only two races a season were shown in full and none of them live. The remainder where highlights or reviews, if shown at all.
At no time have the BBC had their hand forced. They chose to pay an outrageous fee in 2008 against no competition, they approached Sky in 2011 when they could have paid the penalty and relinquished rights to open tender- which C4 could and would have won against ITV and C5.
kers have been saying for a while, things 'matter less' , we have the technology and choice we all wanted, and guess what there is no way back. London424 said:
Hasn't that always been the case?
If you aren't good enough to make it to the top you can't rely on it being a career. Not too long ago even if you made it on the European tour you still might be struggling!
The money in golf is crazy now, and players can make a very decent living without even winning all that much.
The top money in golf is crazy, the rest is a pittance. My brothers been playing on the tour for nigh on twenty years and he's done ok out of it. But when there's more money on the table in stuff away from either the challenge or main tour, then it's an indication of a problem. If your not in the top ten then forget about it basically, and there's plenty of people out there willing to give it a go.If you aren't good enough to make it to the top you can't rely on it being a career. Not too long ago even if you made it on the European tour you still might be struggling!
The money in golf is crazy now, and players can make a very decent living without even winning all that much.
Golf's problem is more to do with peoples attention spans and available free time. Not withstanding the absurd rules, etiquette and other general bollcks. 4 day events anyone?? we can't even agree that some will sit down to watch 6 hours of the WEC.
Isn't there a similar issue with some non league football clubs and the money available in the lower leagues? I seem to recall someone I worked with that could earn a ton of money more than he could playing non league football than he would have got in league 2.
It's all borked.
Gaz. said:
Chrisgr31 said:
I can happily say I have no stats, just opinion, hence my comment that it would be interesting to know the audience profile.
However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
Both BTCC and WRC are on ITV4 which is free to air, with the BTCC meets shown live in their entirety for about 6 hours including support races. WRC dying on it's arse is down to a multitude of factors, mostly because it's utterly crap.However when i was in my 20's I followed both WRC and BTCC, they were broadcast on BBC, had coverage in the national media, big crowds at the circuit, now I hardly know when they are on. No idea what the attendance at the circuit is like though.
It just seems common sense that if you restrict your audience then the fan base will shrink.
Regarding boxing- it's been mainly PPV for 30 years with the odd exception like the Eubank fights that HBO & ESPN didn't want to pay for. All of the big Tyson fights were PPV, all of Prince Naseem's & Lennox Lewis's big ones were PPV. Mayweather's fights are all PPV. Boxing is in the back pages of most newspapers on most days. David Haye was a regular fixture in the papers when he moved up to heavyweight until he retired a few years ago, infact at one point the sports pages were dominated by just him and Louis Suarez.
Golf- the sport has been dying for 10+ years at club level, the USPGA & European tours have never been shown on FTA tv in this country, just the 4 majors which only in the last few years have started to lose the Thursday or Friday or as of next year the entire event so the move to PPV cannot be blamed on golf's decline. If you're going to point fingers then you may want to start with the pedantic rules, the amount of rules, the dress codes and conventions- the under 40's just cannot be arsed when the R&A do their very best to suck the enjoyment out of it. The pensioners might like the tradition, stuffiness & culture but they will soon be dead or immobile.
Falling TV audience figures is in the minds of every single sport and long lived tv programme simply because 27 million homes now have more choice, it is is as simple as that. In the 1970s there were 3 channels, in the 1980s there were 4 channels. 85% of the country can receive at least 15 channels via a freeview set top box, 98% can get at least 70 channels via freesat as of March 2015. You have the same number of homes with a wider choice which in turn means lower figures for every show on TV, decade on decade.
Graham Hill, Jacky Stewart and Jim Clark were household names in the 1960s- yet only two races a season were shown in full and none of them live. The remainder where highlights or reviews, if shown at all.
At no time have the BBC had their hand forced. They chose to pay an outrageous fee in 2008 against no competition, they approached Sky in 2011 when they could have paid the penalty and relinquished rights to open tender- which C4 could and would have won against ITV and C5.
Not sure where your info is from but according to the R and A the numbers playing golf now is about the same as it was a decade ago in Europe but significantly growing in other parts of the world.
In Europe the numbers have fallen in the past 3 or 4 years but before that they steadily grew.
To put another spin on it... people were asking what are the kids watching these days. Perhaps the answer could be "not TV". I know a few younger people and they watch everything on demand. Netflix and YouTube. The F1 YouTube channel doesn't stream the races live does it? Or put replays/highlights on there? Looking at their page they do a "highlights" video that is 3 minutes long.
I do more coverage than that for local rallies on a fan account.
The official F1 YouTube channel has 111,000 subscribers. Their top watched video has 590,000 views (Montoya's Monza lap)
For comparison
Mighty Car Mods - 1.6 million subscribers, top viewed video 4.3 million views. They posted part 2 of their "supercharging a mini" series 1 week ago and that has more views than Montoya's Monza lap. It's just a bunch of Aussies doing up cars!
Even Regular Car Reviews has twice as many subscribers and a video with over 1 million views. It's just a guy who drivers really normal cars and has some rather bizarre ways of describing them!
I don't know if social media is the answer for F1, but it's got to be worth trying a bit harder!
I do more coverage than that for local rallies on a fan account.
The official F1 YouTube channel has 111,000 subscribers. Their top watched video has 590,000 views (Montoya's Monza lap)
For comparison
Mighty Car Mods - 1.6 million subscribers, top viewed video 4.3 million views. They posted part 2 of their "supercharging a mini" series 1 week ago and that has more views than Montoya's Monza lap. It's just a bunch of Aussies doing up cars!
Even Regular Car Reviews has twice as many subscribers and a video with over 1 million views. It's just a guy who drivers really normal cars and has some rather bizarre ways of describing them!
I don't know if social media is the answer for F1, but it's got to be worth trying a bit harder!
jbudgie said:
swisstoni said:
jbudgie said:
entropy said:
London424 said:
You list Darts and Snooker as two examples that apparently have "faded away". I think you'll find Darts is massive still. Record attendences, mega prize money on offer. I'm not a big snooker watcher but I think that's also true there.
Snooker seems to be dying a slow death. Prize money is poor, players constantly moaning they don't earn enough; TV figures are low compared to its peak in the 80s; biggest market is China; 20/20 cricket style gimmicks to make snooker more attractive.Barry Hearn runs snooker and darts yet the latter has become a success.
My dad said today, did people travel all the way to Wales and stand in the cold and rain all day to watch rally cars?. It truly was a different era. On a related point to this thread, on bbc2 today there was a rewind show, showing the 1996 Japanese Grand Prix. Good to see Murray walker reminiscing about the race at the donnington collection. However, on close inspection, the race was mediocre. The TV coverage was very poor, the audio was unsynched and didn't do the engines justice, and the 'try and overtake in the pits' era was already in full flow. Rose tinted specs are superb things..
markcoznottz said:
My dad said today, did people travel all the way to Wales and stand in the cold and rain all day to watch rally cars?. It truly was a different era. On a related point to this thread, on bbc2 today there was a rewind show, showing the 1996 Japanese Grand Prix. Good to see Murray walker reminiscing about the race at the donnington collection. However, on close inspection, the race was mediocre. The TV coverage was very poor, the audio was unsynched and didn't do the engines justice, and the 'try and overtake in the pits' era was already in full flow. Rose tinted specs are superb things..
Agreed that race didn't look as good as I thought.Nor did Bahrain from last year.
Canada 2011 was everything I remembered it being though. Brilliant.
markcoznottz said:
My dad said today, did people travel all the way to Wales and stand in the cold and rain all day to watch rally cars?..
I used to sleep in the car for 5 nights to follow the RAC round the whole route, which went into Wales, England and Scotland in some of the worst weather imaginable. It was brilliant.Current WRC is not the same sport.
moanthebairns said:
Nice to see beeb punt it onto channel two.
Lucky I'm watching this one live and not relying on the recording as id get bloody tennis.
Which is exactly what has just happened to me! Just got in, straight to the tv but I've got two and a half hours of bloody Andy Murray Lucky I'm watching this one live and not relying on the recording as id get bloody tennis.
I'm off to cancel my licence fee, not giving that shower of s
t organisation another penny of my hard earned!Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff