More Pay TV in F1

[Chrisgr31]

France and Italy move on to Pay TV for F1 coverage http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2013/02/france-follo...

I read this article yesterday and not read todays comments however more people seem to be commenting on the issue it may create with sponsors. IE less viewers less sponsorship less money for teams. This has always been my view, yes Bernie gets more money but it doesnt help the teams at all.

[MissChief]

TBH Sponsors don't see Europe as an 'emerging market' and are pushing into China and the Far East which is where there's so much potential for new customers. They don't really care that much about European F1 viewers anymore as F1 is turning global. Lose 5 million 'views' in Europe? Not a big deal when you gain 20 million views of the sport in China and 10 in India is it?

[jonnylayze]

I agree it's about global markets but it's not only about viewing numbers. For most sponsors, what is important is the level of disposable income available to those viewers. We can all have a laugh about the state of the French and Italian economies but I suspect that the average viewer in those countries will still have more money to spend than the average Indian or Chinese viewers.

I think the teams and their sponsors will be very aware of this. What drives BCE is not only money from TV rights but also what race organisers are willing to pay for the rights, it is here that European countries really lag behind "emerging economies" such as India and China where the powers that be are willing to pay for the prestige of hosting an "F1 race"

[realjv]

And then there is this:-

Formula One TV viewing hits the skids
Concerns over payTV strategy after audience declines in markets such as China, Russia, the US and the UK

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/feb/15/formul...

Edited by realjv on Saturday 16th February 10:24

[belleair302]

The US disposable income market is being squeezed and many more people now watch TV on mobile devices. In addition to this NBC Sports now hosts all of the 2013 F1 season and is free to air, with most of the races being shown live and also again later on in the day. Free to air for sports is the only way to attract viewers to a newer sport although it costs a minimum amount to have the channels coming into your home or elsewhere. Sponsors do NOT like PPV as it is very hard to calculate the penetration and actual numbers of viewers. TV figures are usually very misleading anyway. Am not sure how many people in China really watch F1 and how many really will be influenced by sponsorship.

[Fire99]

Just because there are some wealthy folks in the far east etc that like to embrace F1, I'm not certain that equals the masses of TV viewers in such places also wanting to embrace it.
There are still huge cultural differences across the globe and I think it may be a trifle naive to think F1 can be 'relocated' and the new audience will carry on where the old one left off.

'Modern' F1 may also appear to some (including me) as all show and no trousers but with very expensive underpants.

[61GT]

realjv said:

And then there is this:-

Formula One TV viewing hits the skids
Concerns over payTV strategy after audience declines in markets such as China, Russia, the US and the UK

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/feb/15/formul...

Edited by realjv on Saturday 16th February 10:24

Oh please, let this be true!

[rdjohn]

Fire99 said:

'Modern' F1 may also appear to some (including me) as all show and no trousers but with very expensive underpants.

I have to agree, the tail wags the dog. In this respect Mad Max's best idea was Formulae $50million. #

What most viewers want to know who is the fastest driver, so the driver / chassis should be of about equal importance and not 90-95% chassis 5-10% driver, as at present.

The business model is just plain stupid and does perhaps deserve to implode as it also economically screws-up virtually every other form of motor racing.