Liberty Media to 'make changes' in Barcelona...
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
One good thing about dictatorships is that there's only one person to praise or blame.
Thats right because no one else had any influence whatsoever right ? Bernie wandered off to Ferrari and said "Well, seeing as you've been around so long, here's a bunch of extra cash". Likewise, he went to his bosses at CVC and said "I know you weren't that bothered about making money, but I've made $xxxm, here you go".
Derek Smith said:
As for pay TV, I think we will have to wait for their model to develop before we can come to any conclusions. Their YT channel is move that Ecclestone dismissed out of hand, in fact contemptuously.
They have already stated they don't see a need to return to FTA TV and are quite happy with the broadcasters paying. They have suggested that they might look at streaming at some point.Derek Smith said:
Ecclestone is yesterday's man, of little consequence to the sport. Let's forget about him. What would be silly would be to eulogise him and his influences on aspects of the sport. What made F1 exciting, not to say thrilling, are the teams and the drivers. They are the ones that provided the memories and the thrills.
Derek, you and others have told us at great length many, many times that Eccelstone ruined the sport and he's a nasty evil man and so on.Now he's of little consequence. Which is it ?
No-one is suggesting that Bernie is blameless, but to suggest that everything will be wonderful because he's gone is naive in the extreme.
Crafty_ said:
Derek Smith said:
One good thing about dictatorships is that there's only one person to praise or blame.
Thats right because no one else had any influence whatsoever right ? Bernie wandered off to Ferrari and said "Well, seeing as you've been around so long, here's a bunch of extra cash". Likewise, he went to his bosses at CVC and said "I know you weren't that bothered about making money, but I've made $xxxm, here you go".Derek Smith said:
As for pay TV, I think we will have to wait for their model to develop before we can come to any conclusions. Their YT channel is move that Ecclestone dismissed out of hand, in fact contemptuously.
They have already stated they don't see a need to return to FTA TV and are quite happy with the broadcasters paying. They have suggested that they might look at streaming at some point.Derek Smith said:
Ecclestone is yesterday's man, of little consequence to the sport. Let's forget about him. What would be silly would be to eulogise him and his influences on aspects of the sport. What made F1 exciting, not to say thrilling, are the teams and the drivers. They are the ones that provided the memories and the thrills.
Derek, you and others have told us at great length many, many times that Eccelstone ruined the sport and he's a nasty evil man and so on.Now he's of little consequence. Which is it ?
No-one is suggesting that Bernie is blameless, but to suggest that everything will be wonderful because he's gone is naive in the extreme.
2/ Ah! A company said something and you believe them. That's really strange. However, I did not suggest the option of free to air so your information, whilst no doubt useful, has nothing to do with what I stated. I did mention YouTube though and I think that's an option they might try. I might be wrong; I might be right, but their present conduct suggests that they might try new options.
3/ He's yesterday's man. Today it is Liberty. What's so difficult to understand?
You tell me that "to suggest that everything will be wonderful because he's gone is naive in the extreme". Thank you for that information. I will take it on board and continue not to suggest anything of the sort, not saying it 'at great length' time and time again, as I've done for post after post. After all I don't want to be hit by the incisive and clever argument of "
" F1 has any number of problems at the moment, one of which is numbers. There are 20 cars on the grid. The teams at the bottom of the pecking order have to struggle to put inferior cars out there. When was the last time we had more than 26 cars fighting for spaced on the grid? When was Ecclestone's move with front man Mosley for power over F1? There are lots of other problems that have emerged over the same period.
I'm not suggesting it was all strawberries and cream before the take-over, so I'd appreciate not being accused of that.
Due to enlightened self interest, I would assume that Liberty might want to favour the lower teams in some way rather than throw money at the bigger ones. Or they might try some other method of increasing the grid in the interests of their investment. There are lots of ways in which the costs of the sport could be cut, but despite lip service to the concept, budgets have increased almost year on year. The FIA has little influence. The constructors were broken by money being thrust in the hands of certain team managers. Who does that leave? Let me think . . .
The challenge to the concord agreement, if successful, will help Liberty with regards to cost and control. They will be able to push things their way. Whether this will improve the sport from a fan's point of view, which is my only stance, is open to question. We won't know until it happens.
Let's hope though.
As I've stated time and again, my argument is with those who eulogise Ecclestone, suggesting that the sport would not have survived in an enjoyable form without him, or, remarkably, that it wouldn't have even been covered on television. I will continue to argue the reverse.
Derek Smith said:
1/ Either Ecclestone was the decision maker or he wasn't. I think he was, but let's run with him being a lowly tool of CVC. So, why should we suggest he's great when he was merely a hireling doing what he was told?
He wasn't. CVC told him they wanted to make X revenue, make it happen and he did. If you doubt that you must have been living under a rock for a long timeDerek Smith said:
2/ Ah! A company said something and you believe them. That's really strange. However, I did not suggest the option of free to air so your information, whilst no doubt useful, has nothing to do with what I stated. I did mention YouTube though and I think that's an option they might try. I might be wrong; I might be right, but their present conduct suggests that they might try new options.
I mentioned streaming as well, which they said they weren't in a rush to look at but may investigate. I suspect it'll be a case of race highlights or even full races after the event. We're a very long way from live streamingDerek Smith said:
3/ He's yesterday's man. Today it is Liberty. What's so difficult to understand?
You tell me that "to suggest that everything will be wonderful because he's gone is naive in the extreme". Thank you for that information. I will take it on board and continue not to suggest anything of the sort, not saying it 'at great length' time and time again, as I've done for post after post. After all I don't want to be hit by the incisive and clever argument of ""
Why be so obtuse ? you've bYou tell me that "to suggest that everything will be wonderful because he's gone is naive in the extreme". Thank you for that information. I will take it on board and continue not to suggest anything of the sort, not saying it 'at great length' time and time again, as I've done for post after post. After all I don't want to be hit by the incisive and clever argument of "
" 
hed long and hard about Eccelstone being the worst person in the world ever and how he's ruined the sport and all the bad stuff has outweighed the good and then post "he is of little consequence" - Surely, whichever way you look at it his influence has an awful lot of consequences, no ?Derek Smith said:
Due to enlightened self interest, I would assume that Liberty might want to favour the lower teams in some way rather than throw money at the bigger ones. Or they might try some other method of increasing the grid in the interests of their investment. There are lots of ways in which the costs of the sport could be cut, but despite lip service to the concept, budgets have increased almost year on year. The FIA has little influence.
The only reason LM will seek to lower budgets will be to make more money. There has never been "lip service" to cutting budgets, we have seen cost control - most notably with the current engines, but of course that all went out the window when competitors decided they didn't want to do that. And it all went out the window.By the way, there was a key figure in F1 who said the new engines would be far too expensive and wouldn't improve the show, he got outvited. I wonder who that was ? He was completely right of course, no doubt you'll manage to twist events to be Eccelstone's fault.
FIA don't have any influence over the commercial side of things, that was the whole point of the EU ruling 20 odd years ago.
Derek Smith said:
The constructors were broken by money being thrust in the hands of certain team managers.
This is exactly the sort of stupid post you keep putting up here.
I've no doubt you honestly think that Eccelstone has been bribing people to get his own little evil way and that all these team managers are being taken advantage of. Thats not the way it works, it really isn't.
Seriously, if your myopic hatred of Bernie blinds you to everyone who looks after their own interests you seriously need to go and do some research and reading.
Derek Smith said:
As I've stated time and again, my argument is with those who eulogise Ecclestone, suggesting that the sport would not have survived in an enjoyable form without him, or, remarkably, that it wouldn't have even been covered on television. I will continue to argue the reverse.
And no-one can prove what would have happened in either case. However, you can't deny that F1 is still the premier motorsport series in the world - no other car series gets 100,000 people at Silverstone year after year or Monza, Spa, Interlagos and others. The only thing that gets close is Indycar, which has had its own headaches over the years.
WEC has become popular in motorsport circles over the past few years - next time a race is on TV take a look and see how many people are at the track, it still doesn't have the draw despite the massive increase in popularity. I speak to colleagues/friends/acquaintances that aren't even aware that stuff like Blancpain exists.
All that didn't happen by coincidence. Not all of the implications of that are positive, its rare that anything is perfect so we have to accept it warts & all, in the hope that we can improve it.
Crafty_ said:
Derek Smith said:
1/ Either Ecclestone was the decision maker or he wasn't. I think he was, but let's run with him being a lowly tool of CVC. So, why should we suggest he's great when he was merely a hireling doing what he was told?
He wasn't. CVC told him they wanted to make X revenue, make it happen and he did. If you doubt that you must have been living under a rock for a long timeOne of the changes that was already known during the Russian GP weekend as Sky did a piece about it.
http://www.crash.net/f1/news/245356/1/mercedes-rev...
Number/name on the fin, the fin that everyone wants to go.
http://www.crash.net/f1/news/245356/1/mercedes-rev...
Number/name on the fin, the fin that everyone wants to go.
FourWheelDrift said:
One of the changes that was already known during the Russian GP weekend as Sky did a piece about it.
http://www.crash.net/f1/news/245356/1/mercedes-rev...
Number/name on the fin, the fin that everyone wants to go.
Its a step in the right direction....but I don't think its enough http://www.crash.net/f1/news/245356/1/mercedes-rev...
Number/name on the fin, the fin that everyone wants to go.
So people really can't tell the difference between two cars painted the same by looking at the dayglo camera mounting?
Oh and on the CVC thing I used to be on the board of a company that was part owned by CVC and believe me they do give you very clear and concise instructions of when they want out and how much money they want to make.
Oh and on the CVC thing I used to be on the board of a company that was part owned by CVC and believe me they do give you very clear and concise instructions of when they want out and how much money they want to make.
KevinCamaroSS said:
Crafty, your statement makes no sense. BE made all the strategic and tactical decisions. CVC did not tell him to make a specific change, they just wanted the revenue and profits.
I agree, but given the demands from CVC in terms of revenue generation he didn't exactly have a free hand. CVC wanted short term gain, fk the long term, they like a good balance sheet.And for clarity - yes Eccelstone made mistakes, despite what some may tell you the guy is human.
He should have looked at what other sports did/do with social media and fan interaction, NASCAR for one is light years ahead in this.
Ultimately some gambles he made haven't worked out - India and the tax situation is bizarre, Korea just wasn't a goer.
We could argue that he should of balanced money in and out better, but given we don't (and probably won't ever) know the circumstances nor the actual deals made its difficult to say definitively.
LM have a different game plan to CVC, they are interested in long term growth (or so they say), but from what they've already said they are obviously keen on short term income - Pay TV staying, more traces, they let Malaysia walk away instead of cutting a deal.
I think we're going to see another could of GPs in the USA pop up over the next few years. Over the past 3 or so years there has been a big increase in US fans, I think they'll want to exploit that and increase the momentum behind it.
Generally Americans like history and traditions, this is good for the EU races I think.
The real test will come when they have to battle with teams and promoters. Believe it or not Eccelstone didn't always get his way (V6 engines for example). How LM resolve conflicts like that will be interesting.
The most intriguing thing will be what Brawn comes up with.
FourWheelDrift said:
I think they should use something like they use on NASCAR.
When they put graphics up like this.
Something like that occasionally.
That looks great I do like it. However I'd imagine it's complicated enough on a nice steady single camera shot on an oval, can't imagine how they'd do it in F1.When they put graphics up like this.
Something like that occasionally.
hornetrider said:
That looks great I do like it. However I'd imagine it's complicated enough on a nice steady single camera shot on an oval, can't imagine how they'd do it in F1.
That is not so much the problem. The problem is that it's sort of hard to get a sensible shot of one car exiting La Source as the other is halfway up Eau Rouge to put the graphics over. Okay so a Heli at Silverstone would do the trick okay, but then think about Monaco...
That said they do need to work on the graphics. They have been having a mare with them this year with constant failures at AUS and it was not much better by race 2. They also need to make it clearer when they are showing interval times compared to time behind the leader. More than a few times i have had to point out the little text that tells you, and of course those of us who have been watching Motorsport for years can work it out, but try telling your mate who has seen 4 mortor races in his life...
2fast748 said:
Autosport are running the story of "open" scrutineering so that fans and rival teams can see under the skin of the cars.
It could be a good way of killing conspiracy theories about bendy wings etc.
No it won't!It could be a good way of killing conspiracy theories about bendy wings etc.
We will see a new generation of amateur forensic mechanics making wild statements based on no real knowledge - but presented as cold hard fact and proof positive, based on a 90 second once over
It'll be good fun no doubt, but I think it will just fan the conspiracy flames! (for fans anyway)
Rude-boy said:
hornetrider said:
That looks great I do like it. However I'd imagine it's complicated enough on a nice steady single camera shot on an oval, can't imagine how they'd do it in F1.
That is not so much the problem. The problem is that it's sort of hard to get a sensible shot of one car exiting La Source as the other is halfway up Eau Rouge to put the graphics over. Okay so a Heli at Silverstone would do the trick okay, but then think about Monaco...
That said they do need to work on the graphics. They have been having a mare with them this year with constant failures at AUS and it was not much better by race 2. They also need to make it clearer when they are showing interval times compared to time behind the leader. More than a few times i have had to point out the little text that tells you, and of course those of us who have been watching Motorsport for years can work it out, but try telling your mate who has seen 4 mortor races in his life...
hornetrider said:
FourWheelDrift said:
I think they should use something like they use on NASCAR.
When they put graphics up like this.
Something like that occasionally.
That looks great I do like it. However I'd imagine it's complicated enough on a nice steady single camera shot on an oval, can't imagine how they'd do it in F1.When they put graphics up like this.
Something like that occasionally.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff