F1 TV audience dwindling.
Discussion
I posted this on another thread..
Sky have paying public watching the content.. and growing...
Deesee said:
Sky F1 have a core of 800k (paying) viewers & 500k for Quali, with 250k tuning in for the pre/post shows.
For a race also broadcast on Sky One it will add 200k, If they put it on Main Event it will add 300k.
Bahrain & Canada were over 1.2million viewers (4/5pm start times).
On FTA in 2018 C4 averaged 1.7million on live races, (which was down on 2017 circa 300k).
C4 have decent increasing viewing figures at 2million for the highlights, and the British GP
Kiv they (Sky) don’t release figures for Now TV, but last year over 20million individual Sports passes were sold (for which you have access to all sports channels) & also does not viewers in pubs/clubs.
The real story is that C4 lost live viewers and gained highlight viewers, so it’s no surprise that they and the sport want to embrace that.
For the effort (and people) that c4 are flying in I’m surprised they are not doing a F2 highlights show pre highlights, I think that would go down really well.
C4 (by the numbers) have proved that they can deliver viewer numbers by highlights, live tv they were struggling to justify the cost, and with less people watching.For a race also broadcast on Sky One it will add 200k, If they put it on Main Event it will add 300k.
Bahrain & Canada were over 1.2million viewers (4/5pm start times).
On FTA in 2018 C4 averaged 1.7million on live races, (which was down on 2017 circa 300k).
C4 have decent increasing viewing figures at 2million for the highlights, and the British GP
Kiv they (Sky) don’t release figures for Now TV, but last year over 20million individual Sports passes were sold (for which you have access to all sports channels) & also does not viewers in pubs/clubs.
The real story is that C4 lost live viewers and gained highlight viewers, so it’s no surprise that they and the sport want to embrace that.
For the effort (and people) that c4 are flying in I’m surprised they are not doing a F2 highlights show pre highlights, I think that would go down really well.
Sky have paying public watching the content.. and growing...
Deesee said:
C4 (by the numbers) have proved that they can deliver viewer numbers by highlights, live tv they were struggling to justify the cost, and with less people watching.
Sky have paying public watching the content.. and growing...
That's not that surprising though. What C4 have to offer isn't really enough to keep people that engrossed in the sport.. I'm aware several members on here will disagree, but members of an F1 forum are likely fans for life and will watch what they can if they choose not to pay Sky - which is fair enough. The masses though? Nope, they'll get bored soon enough with just highlights.Sky have paying public watching the content.. and growing...
It's just as inevitable imo that some who originally baulked at the Sky price will eventually miss the sport and pay up, so a slow but sure take up makes sense on the PTV side.
None of this has anything much to do with the global trend in viewer and attendance increases over the last few years - the UK with the wonky Sky deal is not representative at all of how healthy F1 is globally right now.
TheDeuce said:
That's not that surprising though. What C4 have to offer isn't really enough to keep people that engrossed in the sport.. I'm aware several members on here will disagree, but members of an F1 forum are likely fans for life and will watch what they can if they choose not to pay Sky - which is fair enough. The masses though? Nope, they'll get bored soon enough with just highlights.
I'm one of those fans for life who won't pay Sky... but I'm not sure your putting down of highlights is accurate. The bigger turn off to the casual viewer, IMO, is long stretches of time where there's no obvious action, ie just "cars going round and round", often made worse by the TV director's choice of cameras and which car to follow.... safety car periods even worse.
Highlights can ditch these "boring" parts and make a (maybe superficially) more involving race for the casual viewer. I'm sure many would get bored much faster with complete races - maybe at the first >3 laps safety car.
defblade said:
I'm one of those fans for life who won't pay Sky... but I'm not sure your putting down of highlights is accurate.
The bigger turn off to the casual viewer, IMO, is long stretches of time where there's no obvious action, ie just "cars going round and round", often made worse by the TV director's choice of cameras and which car to follow.... safety car periods even worse.
Highlights can ditch these "boring" parts and make a (maybe superficially) more involving race for the casual viewer. I'm sure many would get bored much faster with complete races - maybe at the first >3 laps safety car.
True perhaps, for some. Although say you weren't a fan for life, but you did used to watch the odd race when it was FTA... How drawn would you be to watching a highlights show hours after the race had finished? Would it really keep you coming back? I feel after a season of that a lot of people would just start to forget it.The bigger turn off to the casual viewer, IMO, is long stretches of time where there's no obvious action, ie just "cars going round and round", often made worse by the TV director's choice of cameras and which car to follow.... safety car periods even worse.
Highlights can ditch these "boring" parts and make a (maybe superficially) more involving race for the casual viewer. I'm sure many would get bored much faster with complete races - maybe at the first >3 laps safety car.
In fact, we know a lot of people have, millions of viewers have in fact. They're not watching sky or C4 so clearly they've been lost by the current offering.
For me 2019 gaps in action were generally short enough to be more about anticipation of action to come as track battles formed, and they did very often thanks to close midfield and the close top three. Also it's just better to watch those moments live than after the event - for me, I can't speak for everyone of course!
TheDeuce said:
Let's hear it then 
Top 3 things that are wrong and how you think they could be corrected...
Free to air everywhere.Top 3 things that are wrong and how you think they could be corrected...
More realistic deals with circuits meaning better pricing for fans.
More non F1 races on a GP weekend
Better access for fans to facilities at GPs
(You got a bonus additional suggestion).
TheDeuce said:
That's not that surprising though. What C4 have to offer isn't really enough to keep people that engrossed in the sport.. I'm aware several members on here will disagree, but members of an F1 forum are likely fans for life and will watch what they can if they choose not to pay Sky - which is fair enough. The masses though? Nope, they'll get bored soon enough with just highlights.
It's just as inevitable imo that some who originally baulked at the Sky price will eventually miss the sport and pay up, so a slow but sure take up makes sense on the PTV side.
None of this has anything much to do with the global trend in viewer and attendance increases over the last few years - the UK with the wonky Sky deal is not representative at all of how healthy F1 is globally right now.
The reality is that you can get sky sports mobile tv (with f1) for 11£ a month and watch on a tablet, so that’s say 80£ for an 8 month season, or F1 tv on IOS store for 55£ (+ VPN).It's just as inevitable imo that some who originally baulked at the Sky price will eventually miss the sport and pay up, so a slow but sure take up makes sense on the PTV side.
None of this has anything much to do with the global trend in viewer and attendance increases over the last few years - the UK with the wonky Sky deal is not representative at all of how healthy F1 is globally right now.
The next Sky deal will put highlights on you tube (as they have done with the football) 500million views in the first month they did it! (That’s a lot of pennies).
Liberty have already stated that they are more than happy with the canel+/sky model.
Liberty have annual broadcast revenue of 600m usd, Sky Uk (let alone Germany, Italy) is 30% of that.
It’s not going anywhere near free to air.
Eric Mc said:
TheDeuce said:
Let's hear it then
Top 3 things that are wrong and how you think they could be corrected...
Free to air everywhere.Top 3 things that are wrong and how you think they could be corrected...
More realistic deals with circuits meaning better pricing for fans.
More non F1 races on a GP weekend
Better access for fans to facilities at GPs
(You got a bonus additional suggestion).
rscott said:
Eric Mc said:
TheDeuce said:
Let's hear it then
Top 3 things that are wrong and how you think they could be corrected...
Free to air everywhere.Top 3 things that are wrong and how you think they could be corrected...
More realistic deals with circuits meaning better pricing for fans.
More non F1 races on a GP weekend
Better access for fans to facilities at GPs
(You got a bonus additional suggestion).
They are very slowly reversing some of the egregious errors of the Bernie era. As I said, mistakes can be rectified.
I would very much like teams to be less dependent on TV revenues and more dependent on prize money - which should be open and clear to all - none of this sneaky beaky, deals done behind the bike shed approach of Bernie's time in charge. Again, maybe these things will come to pass. But they need to move quicker.
And finally, the teams should NOT have a say in the management of the sport.
I would very much like teams to be less dependent on TV revenues and more dependent on prize money - which should be open and clear to all - none of this sneaky beaky, deals done behind the bike shed approach of Bernie's time in charge. Again, maybe these things will come to pass. But they need to move quicker.
And finally, the teams should NOT have a say in the management of the sport.
Eric Mc said:
They are very slowly reversing some of the egregious errors of the Bernie era. As I said, mistakes can be rectified.
I would very much like teams to be less dependent on TV revenues and more dependent on prize money - which should be open and clear to all - none of this sneaky beaky, deals done behind the bike shed approach of Bernie's time in charge. Again, maybe these things will come to pass. But they need to move quicker.
And finally, the teams should NOT have a say in the management of the sport.
I agree about the last bit!I would very much like teams to be less dependent on TV revenues and more dependent on prize money - which should be open and clear to all - none of this sneaky beaky, deals done behind the bike shed approach of Bernie's time in charge. Again, maybe these things will come to pass. But they need to move quicker.
And finally, the teams should NOT have a say in the management of the sport.
The rest though... The prize money is dependent on TV money, itself increasingly dependant on pay to view as that's where TV itself is destined to go.
The only way to reduce the revenue needed via TV rights is to reduce the overall cost to the teams - which they're doing. And as Deesee points out, they're taking solid steps to address the rest of your wishlist, other than free for everyone, that's just not feasible.
It's a big ship to turn around, but the changes made already by the new owners are as positive and swift as anyone could reasonably expect if they consider all that's involved.
I think it's too little too late. I actually think that motor sport is fading as a popular form of entertainment. It's dying at its roots and at some point that will affect the top level stuff too.
To survive, I think it has to return to a more "amateurish" form of activity with more connectivity with those who actually like cars and can identify and understand the technology. It needs to get away from this unnecessarily complex and irrelevant mess it is today. It peaked in the mid 1990s and has been sliding ever since.
Chasing "new" audiences in previously untapped "markets" is a just extending the decline slightly. Indeed, the whole notion that sport is measured in "markets" is the mindset that ruins sport.
To survive, I think it has to return to a more "amateurish" form of activity with more connectivity with those who actually like cars and can identify and understand the technology. It needs to get away from this unnecessarily complex and irrelevant mess it is today. It peaked in the mid 1990s and has been sliding ever since.
Chasing "new" audiences in previously untapped "markets" is a just extending the decline slightly. Indeed, the whole notion that sport is measured in "markets" is the mindset that ruins sport.
Eric Mc said:
I think it's too little too late. I actually think that motor sport is fading as a popular form of entertainment. It's dying at its roots and at some point that will affect the top level stuff too.
To survive, I think it has to return to a more "amateurish" form of activity with more connectivity with those who actually like cars and can identify and understand the technology. It needs to get away from this unnecessarily complex and irrelevant mess it is today. It peaked in the mid 1990s and has been sliding ever since.
Chasing "new" audiences in previously untapped "markets" is a just extending the decline slightly. Indeed, the whole notion that sport is measured in "markets" is the mindset that ruins sport.
I'm not sure i agree. If you go to most race tracks every weekend in the season and you'll see exactly what you say, people connected to the cars fixing them and driving them. F1 is the equivalent of the Premier League and is just as much a business chasing markets. Park football happens, you just don't see it.To survive, I think it has to return to a more "amateurish" form of activity with more connectivity with those who actually like cars and can identify and understand the technology. It needs to get away from this unnecessarily complex and irrelevant mess it is today. It peaked in the mid 1990s and has been sliding ever since.
Chasing "new" audiences in previously untapped "markets" is a just extending the decline slightly. Indeed, the whole notion that sport is measured in "markets" is the mindset that ruins sport.
Eric Mc said:
I think it's too little too late. I actually think that motor sport is fading as a popular form of entertainment. It's dying at its roots and at some point that will affect the top level stuff too.
To survive, I think it has to return to a more "amateurish" form of activity with more connectivity with those who actually like cars and can identify and understand the technology. It needs to get away from this unnecessarily complex and irrelevant mess it is today. It peaked in the mid 1990s and has been sliding ever since.
Chasing "new" audiences in previously untapped "markets" is a just extending the decline slightly. Indeed, the whole notion that sport is measured in "markets" is the mindset that ruins sport.
Too late? Dying at its roots? So you disagree with the chap quoted below?To survive, I think it has to return to a more "amateurish" form of activity with more connectivity with those who actually like cars and can identify and understand the technology. It needs to get away from this unnecessarily complex and irrelevant mess it is today. It peaked in the mid 1990s and has been sliding ever since.
Chasing "new" audiences in previously untapped "markets" is a just extending the decline slightly. Indeed, the whole notion that sport is measured in "markets" is the mindset that ruins sport.
Eric Mc said:
Of course bad decisions can be undone.
Times do indeed move on. But mistakes and stupidity are not cast in stone and can be reversed or corrected.
It can never go back to amateurish, like all things it must evolve, it is nature - human nature and reflects the way the world turns. All the owners can do is make steady changes to enhance what is best about the sport today, and try and move away from what is not so good.Times do indeed move on. But mistakes and stupidity are not cast in stone and can be reversed or corrected.
As for losing core popularity - probably right to a very limited extent. It's undeniable there has been an increase in people that don't particularly want to be seen as petrol heads or to form any sort of interest in cars full stop, let alone motorsport. But those people, despite being a noisy bunch sometimes, are only so many. At it's absolute core, motorsport is a celebration of human ingenuity and creation (engineering and problem solving), the thrill of speed and power, and competitiveness. These things are elemental to our species and will always attract a significant audience if presented properly and kept relevant enough for people to connect with it on some level. As people change, so must the sport. Has it become a complex mess? No more or less so than every other aspect of day to day life so far as I can see. Everything tends to become more complex as the world evolves and we seek better ways. Everything from how our cars keep us safe to how we dispose of unwanted packaging has become massively more complex since 1990, and none of it can be reversed.
Eric Mc said:
Just because technology is clever does not in itself make it attractive. The washing machine I use today is infinitely smarter than the one I used 20 years ago. It still does a boring job in a boring way.
Irrelevant, technology is shown off as it's something we can all admire on some level, it's the basis of civilisation. Of course the high end stuff is worth showing off about, more than ever if it does something exciting and there is a genuine tooth and nail desire amongst competitors to be the best. That is why F1 works and will continue to work. The core reasons to watch have never changed, don't need to change and will continue to find an audience.Even if I could gift you a time machine, you would find it very difficult to go back in time to point at which F1, (or 'GP'..) was not roughly 1/3 about the technology. It's always been driven by tech, made possible by tech and the audience have always wanted to appreciate the tech and gained a little knowledge from watching what the tech can deliver each season, what preforms best etc etc.
Of course the numbers are dwindling. The last time I attempted to watch an F1 race I dozed off after the first couple of laps because it became just a tedious procession & thus the commentators desperate for something to say & finishing up saying nothing of interest plus of course everybody knew who was going to win the race.
I now prefer to watch real men riding motorbikes & not a diamond ear stud in sight.
I now prefer to watch real men riding motorbikes & not a diamond ear stud in sight.
WJNB said:
Of course the numbers are dwindling. The last time I attempted to watch an F1 race I dozed off after the first couple of laps because it became just a tedious procession & thus the commentators desperate for something to say & finishing up saying nothing of interest plus of course everybody knew who was going to win the race.
I now prefer to watch real men riding motorbikes & not a diamond ear stud in sight.
I know of at least 4 MotoGP Riders past and present that have ear piercings so your point doesn't make any sense. Also in MotoGP you pretty much know that Marc Marquez will win the race. I now prefer to watch real men riding motorbikes & not a diamond ear stud in sight.
Regarding modern F1 the races are FAR more competitive and the cars more evenly matched now than they've ever been. To say racing now is dull makes a mockery of some of the races in the so called 'heyday' of F1 to some people and the races then.
Cars often finished double digit seconds behind each other. 1/3 of the field often retired with mechanical issues. It wasn't unheard of for only three or four cars to be on the lead lap.
Britain 1985. Mansell, Senna, Prost, Rosberg, Lauda. The times people rave about. Prost finished a lap ahead of second. A whole lap! If you don't think Alain was nursing his car like f
king buggery for 3/4 of the race then you don't know F1 at all. Brazil 1989. TWELVE cars retired and 6 were on the lead lap.
Brazil 1992 TWO cars finished on the lead lap. TWO!. The gap? 29.330 seconds. Enthralling I'm sure you'll agree. SIXTEEN cars retired. That's more than finished the race!
1995 British GP. Five cars finished on the lead lap. The last points paying position, 6th, was a lap down!
Lets jump ahead, 2005 British GP. . Cars were getting more reliable it's true, but the gulf in money was also taking it's toll. Nine cars finished on the lead lap.
This year's GP 13 cars finished on the lead lap. There were three retirements. The Hass's crashed into each other (
) and Giovanazzi spun and retired. Reliability is streets ahead of where it used to be compared to even ten years ago. F1 wasn't 'better' then. Some just wear pink glasses and only remember the brief on-track fights that were sporadic in the extreme.Edited by MissChief on Friday 31st January 21:39
WJNB said:
Of course the numbers are dwindling. The last time I attempted to watch an F1 race I dozed off after the first couple of laps because it became just a tedious procession & thus the commentators desperate for something to say & finishing up saying nothing of interest plus of course everybody knew who was going to win the race.
I now prefer to watch real men riding motorbikes & not a diamond ear stud in sight.
Real men!? There hasn't ever been a man or woman that's ever entered into competitive racing without accepting that their passion is taking them to a dangerous place. All the diamonds in the world won't change that fact. They're all there because they deserve to be, and wish to be. For our entertainment in addition to what they take from it personally.I now prefer to watch real men riding motorbikes & not a diamond ear stud in sight.
Every last one of them is 'real'. Watch harder.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff