Formula One - TV Historic Audience Figures
Discussion
Can anyone provide any figures?
My guess is that there might be a long-term decline for UK, but probably an increase worldwide.
Is it possible to compare say;
1979, 1989, 1999, 2009, 2019, for both UK and worldwide?
Live viewers, but with a split for UK 2019, between live and highlights.
Just interested in what the trend has been.
We have seen an enormous reduction in the number of spectators attending club racing events in the UK, since the 1970s.
Do shopping centres really provide so much more entertainment? -
What is far more interesting is the fact at a point- (possibly in the 90s , perhaps early noughties ) the TV tail started to wave the sport dog . to its detriment . Growing up before its saturation coverage , the sport had its own charm . Hunt's legendary '76 season was largely untelevised , and there was a time when not only did I see not only the GP from trackside , but a couple of non championship races as well ,
Jon39 said:
Can anyone provide any figures?
My guess is that there might be a long-term decline for UK, but probably an increase worldwide.
Is it possible to compare say;
1979, 1989, 1999, 2009, 2019, for both UK and worldwide?
Live viewers, but with a split for UK 2019, between live and highlights.
Just interested in what the trend has been.
We have seen an enormous reduction in the number of spectators attending club racing events in the UK, since the 1970s.
Do shopping centres really provide so much more entertainment? -
Sky has around 200,000 UK consumers subscribed to Sky f1.
If the only way to watch an F1 race live was to pay for Sky F1, the audience would be absolutely tiny.
The original Sky F1 audience was much larger as it included regular sky subscribers, then just sky sports subscribers, then it was just sky F1 - hence tiny numbers.
It gets larger when you add in pubs and Sky go multi device audiences but its still minuscule in the world of sports advertising.
The old audience figures quoted for F1 were made up nonsense based on estimated viewers from syndicated broadcasts around the world.
Luckily for advertisers the technology has moved on so much they wont fall for made up audiences of old, now with broadband TV and programmatic ads the stats are factual, Bernies lies are a thing of the past, the real numbers are available, Liberty Media will still make money but its no surprise the teams struggle to get sponsors now as F1 is a minority sport - no one is watching. They need to fix it quick with free to air coverage on terrestrial TV and make web access easy to get (and free).
If the only way to watch an F1 race live was to pay for Sky F1, the audience would be absolutely tiny.
The original Sky F1 audience was much larger as it included regular sky subscribers, then just sky sports subscribers, then it was just sky F1 - hence tiny numbers.
It gets larger when you add in pubs and Sky go multi device audiences but its still minuscule in the world of sports advertising.
The old audience figures quoted for F1 were made up nonsense based on estimated viewers from syndicated broadcasts around the world.
Luckily for advertisers the technology has moved on so much they wont fall for made up audiences of old, now with broadband TV and programmatic ads the stats are factual, Bernies lies are a thing of the past, the real numbers are available, Liberty Media will still make money but its no surprise the teams struggle to get sponsors now as F1 is a minority sport - no one is watching. They need to fix it quick with free to air coverage on terrestrial TV and make web access easy to get (and free).
In the UK I would think that the figures peaked in 1997/98 in the wake of Damon Hill’s championship.
Before 1978, F1 coverage in the UK was patchy
The first season where every race was covered live was 1996.
BBC lost the rights to F1 at the end of that season with ITV taking over for 1997.
.
Before 1978, F1 coverage in the UK was patchy
The first season where every race was covered live was 1996.
BBC lost the rights to F1 at the end of that season with ITV taking over for 1997.
.
rallycross said:
Bernies lies are a thing of the past
He'd count things such as the news running footage of a race or other programmes with F1 content as 'audience'. So, if 6m watched the race and then 10m watched the news that evening and they run a piece on the race the audience would be 16m. In advertising, this is known as 'Impact' which is different to viewing audience (known as reach). In fairness to him, he wasn't the only media owner to forget to explain the difference and he's certainly not the last.
StevieBee said:
He'd count things such as the news running footage of a race or other programmes with F1 content as 'audience'. So, if 6m watched the race and then 10m watched the news that evening and they run a piece on the race the audience would be 16m. In advertising, this is known as 'Impact' which is different to viewing audience (known as reach).
In fairness to him, he wasn't the only media owner to forget to explain the difference and he's certainly not the last.
Counting Impacts is fair enough, particularly if you're one of the brands being broadcast in the TV news item.In fairness to him, he wasn't the only media owner to forget to explain the difference and he's certainly not the last.
Getting audiences beyond YT clips and staying a full 90mins as with football requires sustained action. Since Paul Ricard this has been the case and needs to continue if Liberty is to succeed.
rallycross said:
Sky has around 200,000 UK consumers subscribed to Sky f1.
If the only way to watch an F1 race live was to pay for Sky F1, the audience would be absolutely tiny.
The original Sky F1 audience was much larger as it included regular sky subscribers, then just sky sports subscribers, then it was just sky F1 - hence tiny numbers.
It gets larger when you add in pubs and Sky go multi device audiences but its still minuscule in the world of sports advertising.
The old audience figures quoted for F1 were made up nonsense based on estimated viewers from syndicated broadcasts around the world.
Luckily for advertisers the technology has moved on so much they wont fall for made up audiences of old, now with broadband TV and programmatic ads the stats are factual, Bernies lies are a thing of the past, the real numbers are available, Liberty Media will still make money but its no surprise the teams struggle to get sponsors now as F1 is a minority sport - no one is watching. They need to fix it quick with free to air coverage on terrestrial TV and make web access easy to get (and free).
I'm surprised the skyF1 deal has lasted as long as it has, given the combination of the sport even at its heights being pretty niche and the simple fact that the great British public by and large hate paying a premium.If the only way to watch an F1 race live was to pay for Sky F1, the audience would be absolutely tiny.
The original Sky F1 audience was much larger as it included regular sky subscribers, then just sky sports subscribers, then it was just sky F1 - hence tiny numbers.
It gets larger when you add in pubs and Sky go multi device audiences but its still minuscule in the world of sports advertising.
The old audience figures quoted for F1 were made up nonsense based on estimated viewers from syndicated broadcasts around the world.
Luckily for advertisers the technology has moved on so much they wont fall for made up audiences of old, now with broadband TV and programmatic ads the stats are factual, Bernies lies are a thing of the past, the real numbers are available, Liberty Media will still make money but its no surprise the teams struggle to get sponsors now as F1 is a minority sport - no one is watching. They need to fix it quick with free to air coverage on terrestrial TV and make web access easy to get (and free).
rallycross said:
Sky has around 200,000 UK consumers subscribed to Sky f1.
If the only way to watch an F1 race live was to pay for Sky F1, the audience would be absolutely tiny.
The original Sky F1 audience was much larger as it included regular sky subscribers, then just sky sports subscribers, then it was just sky F1 - hence tiny numbers.
It gets larger when you add in pubs and Sky go multi device audiences but its still minuscule in the world of sports advertising.
The old audience figures quoted for F1 were made up nonsense based on estimated viewers from syndicated broadcasts around the world.
Luckily for advertisers the technology has moved on so much they wont fall for made up audiences of old, now with broadband TV and programmatic ads the stats are factual, Bernies lies are a thing of the past, the real numbers are available, Liberty Media will still make money but its no surprise the teams struggle to get sponsors now as F1 is a minority sport - no one is watching. They need to fix it quick with free to air coverage on terrestrial TV and make web access easy to get (and free).
Perhaps 200,000 Sky customers subscribe only to Sky Sports F1, Around 90% of Sky Sports subscribers have the whole sports package, which includes F1, so their potential viewing audience is several million.If the only way to watch an F1 race live was to pay for Sky F1, the audience would be absolutely tiny.
The original Sky F1 audience was much larger as it included regular sky subscribers, then just sky sports subscribers, then it was just sky F1 - hence tiny numbers.
It gets larger when you add in pubs and Sky go multi device audiences but its still minuscule in the world of sports advertising.
The old audience figures quoted for F1 were made up nonsense based on estimated viewers from syndicated broadcasts around the world.
Luckily for advertisers the technology has moved on so much they wont fall for made up audiences of old, now with broadband TV and programmatic ads the stats are factual, Bernies lies are a thing of the past, the real numbers are available, Liberty Media will still make money but its no surprise the teams struggle to get sponsors now as F1 is a minority sport - no one is watching. They need to fix it quick with free to air coverage on terrestrial TV and make web access easy to get (and free).
0.9million watched the British Grand Prix on Sky ( https://motorsportbroadcasting.com/tag/ratings/ ) .
340,000 watched the Canadian Grand Prix on Sky Sports Main Event - that excludes those watching on Sky Sports F1 . There were also 100,000 app based viewers..
patmahe said:
A little o/t, but I think I'd rather not watch F1 at all than to pay sky to do so. The fans give F1 the power and money to do what they do simply by watching, we shouldn't pay for that, if the fans stop watching, the sponsorship will dry up.
That's your choice. Many of us are happy to pay Sky for the great coverage. Long may it continue. (....and I hope the energy drinks man doesn't have a change of heart, because then the show could well be over)2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
patmahe said:
A little o/t, but I think I'd rather not watch F1 at all than to pay sky to do so. The fans give F1 the power and money to do what they do simply by watching, we shouldn't pay for that, if the fans stop watching, the sponsorship will dry up.
(....and I hope the energy drinks man doesn't have a change of heart, because then the show could well be over)patmahe said:
A little o/t, but I think I'd rather not watch F1 at all than to pay sky to do so. The fans give F1 the power and money to do what they do simply by watching, we shouldn't pay for that, if the fans stop watching, the sponsorship will dry up.
Sponsorship doesn't work like that. It used to but not any more. Look at the brands that prevail in the sport at the moment. How many fans who attend or watch on a Sunday afternoon are in the market for a new Rolex or Aston Martin? Lots of people (rightly) question Rich Energy but when was the last time you spotted a bottle of BWT water product in Asda or a can of Petrobras in Halfords?The relationship between fans and the brands that sponsor the sport has long been de-coupled. This is why you no longer see mass market brands in the sport, or many sports come to that.
Previous TV audiences were boosted because there was little choice. If it was a rainy Sunday afternoon and a Grand Prix was on, the options were the East Enders Ominbus, Antiques Roadshow or some rubbish B-movie. Sky started to offer a wider choice and today, you can fire up Netflix or Amazon or whatever and watch whatever you like. So the casual, semi-interested viewer no longer exists.
This has impacted all sports and sponsorship reflects this by being used as part of a wider marketing strategy that is not dependent on brand awareness and recognition but brand association, something you don't need live viewers for.
It's wrong to say that fans are not important but the harsh reality is that we have no power and never have. We just like watching the sport. Some of us are willing to pay a premium to watch a premium broadcast. Other, less so. And that's fine.
Edited by StevieBee on Wednesday 21st August 22:02
It's delusional tosh , snake oil nonsense spouted by bulls
t bingo marketing men with budgets to blow on -retch - the Paddock Club. Aston Martin? Nobody buys them , never have in any numbers and now the shares are on the dive , Petronas ? Whatever ...I can see how it works for Red Bull - as it did for JPS and Marlboro.
Bit like BTCC - who has ever seen a Levorg on the road ?
t bingo marketing men with budgets to blow on -retch - the Paddock Club. Aston Martin? Nobody buys them , never have in any numbers and now the shares are on the dive , Petronas ? Whatever ...I can see how it works for Red Bull - as it did for JPS and Marlboro. Bit like BTCC - who has ever seen a Levorg on the road ?
coppice said:
It's delusional tosh , snake oil nonsense spouted by bullst bingo marketing men with budgets to blow on -retch - the Paddock Club. Aston Martin? Nobody buys them , never have in any numbers and now the shares are on the dive , Petronas ? Whatever ...I can see how it works for Red Bull - as it did for JPS and Marlboro.
Well, yes, there's plenty examples of that. A lot of sponsorship in motorsport is as a result of the interest in the sport of successful business owners who fancy a bit of the action, shrouded in facade of 'brand building' or some such. Some owners do golf weekends. Other do motor sport.t bingo marketing men with budgets to blow on -retch - the Paddock Club. Aston Martin? Nobody buys them , never have in any numbers and now the shares are on the dive , Petronas ? Whatever ...I can see how it works for Red Bull - as it did for JPS and Marlboro. But this belies the rest that is well thought out, well reasoned and as a result, effective. I'm consulting on a project at the moment that will hopefully bring a brand into the sport, (in a formula that few people will have heard of or seen - yet!) with the sole purpose of better positioning that brand against its competitors who are currently active in the sport; something that will only really become tangible at the point of sale.
As for Formula 1, many tend to forget that its has a global audience. Petronas isn't really pushed that much in the UK but in Asia its huge and their involvements with Mercedes has had huge benefit in terms of sales.
coppice said:
Bit like BTCC - who has ever seen a Levorg on the road ?
They've sold 11,739 of them since 2015, sales worth £352m. If just 5% of these sales were triggered as a result of their involvement in BTCC, that's still £17m of sales from an investment of less that £1m.rscott said:
Around 90% of Sky Sports subscribers have the whole sports package, which includes F1, so their potential viewing audience is several million.
The important word there being potential. I'd guess that most of those subscribers are there for the football and go with everything as it's only a little more expensive. How many of them ever watch the F1 chanel though? I'm on the flip side and don't subscribe to the Sky F1 channel because I'd have to pay for all the football I don't want to watch too (Virgin Media).rscott said:
0.9million watched the British Grand Prix on Sky ( https://motorsportbroadcasting.com/tag/ratings/ ) .
That would be the British GP that was also broadcast free on the Sky One channel if I remember correctly. How many of those 0.9million watch it on the Sky F1 channel...?//j17 said:
rscott said:
Around 90% of Sky Sports subscribers have the whole sports package, which includes F1, so their potential viewing audience is several million.
The important word there being potential. I'd guess that most of those subscribers are there for the football and go with everything as it's only a little more expensive. How many of them ever watch the F1 chanel though? I'm on the flip side and don't subscribe to the Sky F1 channel because I'd have to pay for all the football I don't want to watch too (Virgin Media).rscott said:
0.9million watched the British Grand Prix on Sky ( https://motorsportbroadcasting.com/tag/ratings/ ) .
That would be the British GP that was also broadcast free on the Sky One channel if I remember correctly. How many of those 0.9million watch it on the Sky F1 channel...?Don't believe it was on Sky One - that had the cricket on it.. The 0.9m was Sky Sports F1 only.
rscott said:
https://motorsportbroadcasting.com/2019/07/15/brit...
Don't believe it was on Sky One - that had the cricket on it.. The 0.9m was Sky Sports F1 only.
Turned into a working link for you.Don't believe it was on Sky One - that had the cricket on it.. The 0.9m was Sky Sports F1 only.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff