F1 only pay for view (not free to air)
Discussion
r11co said:
Where did I do that?
Two people came on singing the praises of Sky's F1 package (one even boasting about the size of his 'package'). All seemed a bit cozy and unrealistic.
‘Cosy and unrealistic’ how? Do you not believe that some people might not mind paying for Sky and enjoy the content? Or are you genuinely suspicious that Sky are employing members of Pistonheads in an effort to brainwash you? Two people came on singing the praises of Sky's F1 package (one even boasting about the size of his 'package'). All seemed a bit cozy and unrealistic.
r11co said:
colonel c said:
Let’s not forget who started the insults by labelling anyone content to pay a Sky subscription as a ‘shill’.
Where did I do that?CraigyMc said:
r11co said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I’ll be enjoying some excellent racing.....
Now I know you are shill.
PS. The above was sarcasm, echoing a widely held opinion regards the quality of F1 'racing' in recent seasons, hence the
As I said though, the consequences of this are predictable. The next TV rights bid will go for peanuts, and when the writing starts appearing on the wall expect a large tranche of races to appear on Sky Sports Mix. If Hamilton retires before Sky's exclusive deal ends I won't be surprised if they move the whole thing on earlier. F1 is not sustainable on TV to a small audience and the legacy package support by Sky is currently a great way to inflate the numbers.
Edited by r11co on Wednesday 7th February 18:42
r11co said:
CraigyMc said:
Personally I think r11co has just discovered the word "shill" and is using it excitedly all over the place, irrespective of whether or not it conveys what he really means.
Play the ball and not the man, why don't you. So far in response to my point (with evidence) about F1 on Sky being poor value for money I have had one sensible reply comparing F1 to other motorsport subscriptions that offer far more content, one 'I'm all right jack' from someone on a legacy package who's opinions are not representative of the new customers the sport needs to attract as they will not get the same deal, and some personal insults.I will get my F1 fix (legally and at a significantly lesser cost than Sky's offering) because I have the technical nous. Not everyone does or would be willing to jump through the same hoops, and they would not consider the simpler option of paying Sky for a channel that for the vast majority of its time will be broadcasting filler as worth the money.
Eyes on the screen will fall and that will damage the sport in the long-run. F1 has a smaller footprint in terms of number of events and just doesn't suit the subscription model long term. Bernie knew that.
IF Sky were to offer instead a Sky Motorsports channel with F1 being the showpiece (using the same model as all their other sports channels) then things might be different.
Edited by r11co on Wednesday 7th February 10:25
Single yearly events the Superbowl does well, the Champions League final between Atetico Madrid and Real Madrid in 2016 got 350 million viewers. But this pales into insignificance when you look at the World Cup, every four years. The final between Argentina and Germany in 2014 got 913 million worldwide viewers. However even that is still less than the Cricket world cup between India and Pakistan in 2015 where over a BILLION people watched. Still not as many as the Summer Olympics with 3.5 Billion viewers in 2016. Tour de France in 2016 was 'watched' by 1.5 billion people, but I'm not sure how an event that lasts three weeks or more counts viewers. 2015 Women's world cup in 2015 even managed 750 million worldwide, but these are not events that happen more often than once a year, sometimes every two or four years.
Regarding F1 viewers Formula 1 themselves released this themselves so, I'll agree, hardly independent and unbiased, but it does state than viewership in the major European markets ROSE across the board. I'll cherry pick some stats:
Formula1.com said:
The TV cumulative audience - i.e. the aggregate of the average audience of all the F1 programs broadcast across the year - in the top 20 markets* (based on ranking of TV audience) stood at 1.4 billion, which represents an increase of 6.2% compared to 2016.
The top four markets - Germany, Brazil, Italy and the UK, ranked by absolute figures - all registered positive growth. The strongest was Italy (+19.1%), followed by Brazil (+13.4%), the UK (+3.9%) and Germany (+0.9%). Other significant increases were registered in China (+42.2%), Switzerland (+14.3%) and Denmark (+14.1%).
Remember that 1.4 Billion is a yearly figure. No other regular sporting event reaches as many people as Formula 1 does. To say it's in decline anywhere, never mind in the UK is factually incorrect. We'll see what happens in 2019 though.The top four markets - Germany, Brazil, Italy and the UK, ranked by absolute figures - all registered positive growth. The strongest was Italy (+19.1%), followed by Brazil (+13.4%), the UK (+3.9%) and Germany (+0.9%). Other significant increases were registered in China (+42.2%), Switzerland (+14.3%) and Denmark (+14.1%).
- Top 20 markets, in alphabetical order: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, UK and USA.
MissChief said:
Regarding F1 viewers Formula 1 themselves released this themselves so, I'll agree, hardly independent and unbiased, but it does state than viewership in the major European markets ROSE across the board.
F1's growth forecasts called into question.Hidden amongst F1's full publication that the article you have linked to references is the revelation that Sky Deutschland did not bother to renew their rights deal or pursue an exclusive deal of the type Sky UK has, but projections for a similar amount of money their previous deal raised have been factored into F1's future growth figures. Similar for Latin America. This is a tad disingenuous as there are no new deals in place. There is still time for new deals to be struck, but Liberty have just handed the TV companies there a huge bargaining chip, assuming anyone wants to pick up the rights at this late stage. Unlikely in Germany as they have decided to continue instead with RTL and a a full free-to-air package (ironically).....
The key quote from the report is this....
Morgan Stanley said:
broadcast contracts (may be) renewed under less favorable terms
Liberty are spinning the figures, but even they acknowledge that their planned business model is being hamstrung by exclusive long term pay-tv broadcast rights deals set up before they took over. Liberty have acknowledged that a combination of accessible broadcast of the races via packages sold to broadcasters (or provided by their own broadcast channels) and an enhanced package of data, multiple views and wraparound coverage from a streaming service provided directly by them is the way they should go, but it is going to be a while before they get there not because of will but because of legacy contracts (the Sky UK one being a case in point).MissChief said:
We'll see what happens in 2019 though.
I think we may see the effect sooner as Italy goes pay-tv only as of this year.Edited by r11co on Thursday 8th February 06:58
bobbo89 said:
MissChief said:
The strongest was Italy (+19.1%)
Just goes to show how much national success makes a difference to a nations interest in a sport! If "and it's a big IF" F1 became more exciting on track then they could charge the amount being asked by Sky etc.
I am sure many on here would then be prepared to then pay. People are not stupid now and there are many other ways of finding live races or just waiting until the highlights.
Anyway since 2016 I decided to stop paying for SKY F1. Yes I miss sitting down on a Sunday and watching F1 but it's not worth the money.
My major issue about 2018 is the fact F1 is getting even more PC. Yes the "halo" is to help head protection but for me it is another reason to turn off. The grid girl ban does not bother me but things are just getting more and more diluted and boring.
I could go on and on but the love I had for F1 is long gone.
I am sure many on here would then be prepared to then pay. People are not stupid now and there are many other ways of finding live races or just waiting until the highlights.
Anyway since 2016 I decided to stop paying for SKY F1. Yes I miss sitting down on a Sunday and watching F1 but it's not worth the money.
My major issue about 2018 is the fact F1 is getting even more PC. Yes the "halo" is to help head protection but for me it is another reason to turn off. The grid girl ban does not bother me but things are just getting more and more diluted and boring.
I could go on and on but the love I had for F1 is long gone.
r11co said:
Indeed. Liberty are only quoting the total viewing figures for the whole season's coverage. It would be interesting to see the race-by-race figures and see if there was a marked drop-off after Singapore (I'll bet my house there was).
Going by these figures things are only going to get worse.Social media has had a big increase but F1 were not exactly great in that department so it is bound to be up
SKY and Channel 4 combined figures
During 2017, a combined average audience of 2.52 million viewers watched Formula 1’s race day action across Channel 4 and Sky Sports, a decrease of 4.0 percent on last year’s average audience of 2.63 million viewers. F1 has lost exactly a third of its UK television audience since it left the BBC in 2015. The BBC’s television audience in 2015 was 3.74 million viewers, meaning that 2017 results in a 33 percent drop. Like last year, this year’s audience will be the lowest for Formula 1 since at least 2005.
ELUSIVEJIM said:
During 2017, a combined average audience of 2.52 million viewers watched Formula 1’s race day action across Channel 4 and Sky Sports, a decrease of 4.0 percent on last year’s average audience of 2.63 million viewers. F1 has lost exactly a third of its UK television audience since it left the BBC in 2015. The BBC’s television audience in 2015 was 3.74 million viewers, meaning that 2017 results in a 33 percent drop. Like last year, this year’s audience will be the lowest for Formula 1 since at least 2005.
And that's the thing. F1 bigwigs are reporting viewing figures based on combined FTA and pay-to-view audiences and then claiming projected revenue figures based on money raised previously in countries that had pay-to-view deals that have expired and not been renewed (or more likely the broadcasters are taking Liberty to the brink to drive a hard bargain as they know the sport isn't worth the money they are claiming in the report, or the value is too volatile to make big up-front investments viable). Trying to have their cake and eat it.
Edited by r11co on Thursday 8th February 11:46
Gaz. said:
r11co said:
The BBC got stung.
How?I deliberately deleted that statement because the BBC is too emotive a topic and I don't want to get embroiled in a political argument regarding its funding, but basically the argument comes down to the value of F1 rights being subject to a lot of volatility due to factors like national interest waning and/or the retirement of superstar drivers, not to mention a rules system that can end the competition months before the actual end of the season (by all accounts it would seem that China's F1 following would take a battering if Raikonnen retired).
You can see from the UK and the other 'big' F1 following nations that TV rights yo-yo between broadcasters because invariably one bids when the value is high and then doesn't see the return on the investment when viewing figures/subscriptions fall because of the factors mentioned above and so bids low or bows out the next time round.
Other sports like football don't see the same sort of volatility because the inter-team battles still matter all the way down the pecking order and there are competitions for promotion/demotion to keep the interest.
Edited by r11co on Thursday 8th February 14:41
MissChief said:
Sounds like Liberty are taking the short term pain for long term gain route which will eventually grow the business beyond where it is now, even with a drop in the next few years.
I don't think they were given any choice in the matter (as they have acknowledged themselves). It is a mistake of their own doing as they should have picked up on the strategic issues as part of due diligence rather than just looking at the bottom line (as Bernie has repeated often he was just doing his job tying F1 to high-price TV rights deals regardless of the broadcasters' intentions or ability to sustain them, fattening the cow before sending it to market).The problem for them though is how much damage will be done in the interim if people stop watching because the cost is too great and then discover they don't really miss it and don't bother coming back, and at the same time the sport's limited exposure means new fans are not taking the place of the old ones.
Short term pain which will make long-term gain harder as Liberty will then have to work just to make up ground from where the sport was before they took over.
Edited by r11co on Thursday 8th February 14:45
r11co said:
r11co said:
colonel c said:
Let’s not forget who started the insults by labelling anyone content to pay a Sky subscription as a ‘shill’.
Where did I do that?CraigyMc said:
r11co said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I’ll be enjoying some excellent racing.....
Now I know you are shill.
r11co said:
The Sky shills in here are so easy to spot in this thread.
CraigyMc said:
r11co said:
colonel c said:
Let’s not forget who started the insults by labelling anyone content to pay a Sky subscription as a ‘shill’.
Where did I do that?r11co said:
The Sky shills in here are so easy to spot in this thread.
Gaz. said:
The BBC truly are the villains in all this, yet some seem utterly desperate to excuse them.
As I said, I didn't want to get embroiled in an argument about the 'bad BBC', plus it is irrelevant to this discussion as the BBC deal would have expired by the time the Sky exclusive deal kicked in.What's done is done and I do not think it would have made the slightest bit of difference going forward. Bernie settled for the biggest promised pay-check knowing it would inflate the short-term value of Delta Topco and at the same time f
k things up longer term for the eventual buyers should they dispense with his services as negotiator.Edited by r11co on Thursday 8th February 15:58
r11co said:
CraigyMc said:
r11co said:
colonel c said:
Let’s not forget who started the insults by labelling anyone content to pay a Sky subscription as a ‘shill’.
Where did I do that?r11co said:
The Sky shills in here are so easy to spot in this thread.
Gaz. said:
The BBC truly are the villains in all this, yet some seem utterly desperate to excuse them.
As I said, I didn't want to get embroiled in an argument about the 'bad BBC', plus it is irrelevant to this discussion as the BBC deal would have expired by the time the Sky exclusive deal kicked in.Edited by r11co on Thursday 8th February 15:53
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff