Official 2019 Chinese Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***
Discussion
cuprabob said:
If you could move either Toto or Lewis to Ferrari, which would you think would have the biggest impact?
Lewis. Toto isn't as transferable, he was involved with Mercedes ahead of F1 so is driven to make it work. Also, having worked in Italy and Germany several times, let's just say there are very different cultures in the work place!! Toto is essentially a man driven to succeed. A businessman really, just so happens he has a racing bent and specific interests at Mercedes so is perfect for the job.
But to complete the answer.. if you moved Lewis to Ferrari and CLC to Mercedes.. I think CLC might win out. It's a tough one, the Mercedes overall is the better car I think, and in general Mercedes are a strong team. But Lewis is endlessly cool and has the confidence of 5 titles.
rdjohn said:
Hamilton was asked in Barcelona about UK viewing figures for his first and last WDCs.
When Hamilton won his first world championship in the 2008 Brazilian Grand Prix, 8.9 million people watched the free-to-air broadcast live in the UK. Last year just 1.28 million saw the live coverage of his fifth world title win on pay-TV.
An extra couple of million YouTube viewers do not add much to Liberty’s coffers.
Yup and this is just another problem. It also effects sponsorship revenue in a massive way; big global companies are less reluctant to sponsor teams when they can get far better coverage in other sports for less expense. This has a larger impact for the small struggling teams like WilliamsWhen Hamilton won his first world championship in the 2008 Brazilian Grand Prix, 8.9 million people watched the free-to-air broadcast live in the UK. Last year just 1.28 million saw the live coverage of his fifth world title win on pay-TV.
An extra couple of million YouTube viewers do not add much to Liberty’s coffers.
TobyTR said:
Yup and this is just another problem. It also effects sponsorship revenue in a massive way; big global companies are less reluctant to sponsor teams when they can get far better coverage in other sports for less expense. This has a larger impact for the small struggling teams like Williams
Make a case for a brand you think would sponsorWilliams next year.. I'm lost on it to be honest.
Beyond the Williams example I kind of agree. The caveat being that the top two teams directly support sales of road cars via their F1 exploits, and the number 3 team just wants to raise headlines to sell energy drinks, which they do - win or lose.
Vaud said:
The Moose said:
TobyTR said:
Clutching at straws. Still goes without saying, this is the most dominant era by one team in the history of F1; it's no wonder viewing figures are less than 50% of what they were in 2007...
Out of interest, where are you seeing the viewing figures have dropped by more than 50%?https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.formula...
490.2m unique viewers
https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1031656_f1s-tv...
600m in 2008
So a change, but pretty robust, plus viewing habits are changing (more youtube, etc)
That F1 website press release was inaccurate - headline says "audiences grow for second year running" (2017-2018), when 2017 was very much a decline in unique viewers.
TobyTR said:
A more accurate and independent article than the Formula 1 website press releases (which is basically PR fluff): https://www.forbes.com/sites/csylt/2018/01/06/f1-t...
That F1 website press release was inaccurate - headline says "audiences grow for second year running" (2017-2018), when 2017 was very much a decline in unique viewers.
Are you still saying that figures are less than 50% of what they were in 2007...?That F1 website press release was inaccurate - headline says "audiences grow for second year running" (2017-2018), when 2017 was very much a decline in unique viewers.
TheDeuce said:
TobyTR said:
Yup and this is just another problem. It also effects sponsorship revenue in a massive way; big global companies are less reluctant to sponsor teams when they can get far better coverage in other sports for less expense. This has a larger impact for the small struggling teams like Williams
Make a case for a brand you think would sponsorWilliams next year.. I'm lost on it to be honest.
Beyond the Williams example I kind of agree. The caveat being that the top two teams directly support sales of road cars via their F1 exploits, and the number 3 team just wants to raise headlines to sell energy drinks, which they do - win or lose.
Exige77 said:
TheDeuce said:
TobyTR said:
Yup and this is just another problem. It also effects sponsorship revenue in a massive way; big global companies are less reluctant to sponsor teams when they can get far better coverage in other sports for less expense. This has a larger impact for the small struggling teams like Williams
Make a case for a brand you think would sponsorWilliams next year.. I'm lost on it to be honest.
Beyond the Williams example I kind of agree. The caveat being that the top two teams directly support sales of road cars via their F1 exploits, and the number 3 team just wants to raise headlines to sell energy drinks, which they do - win or lose.
cuprabob said:
Exige77 said:
TheDeuce said:
TobyTR said:
Yup and this is just another problem. It also effects sponsorship revenue in a massive way; big global companies are less reluctant to sponsor teams when they can get far better coverage in other sports for less expense. This has a larger impact for the small struggling teams like Williams
Make a case for a brand you think would sponsorWilliams next year.. I'm lost on it to be honest.
Beyond the Williams example I kind of agree. The caveat being that the top two teams directly support sales of road cars via their F1 exploits, and the number 3 team just wants to raise headlines to sell energy drinks, which they do - win or lose.
Remember the Canon Williams days with fondness,
TobyTR said:
Vaud said:
Are you still saying that figures are less than 50% of what they were in 2007...?
Not far off to be fair 
hardly positive is itAnd it's irrelevant anyway. In 2007 most people watched for free... Now in most parts of the world you have to pay in some way. That will clearly lead to a drop in viewers, but it's not a 50% drop, which if anything is impressive as it shows just how much so many of us are prepared to pay to watch.
I understand this is a particular point of contention in the UK with SKY holding the rights, and it is too expensive now. Yet.. I pay and apparently so do more than enough people to make it worthwhile for the content providers. Attendance at each weekend is also on the up, so any suggestion that the sport is less appealing is tough to accept. The sport is actually very healthy I think.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff