Declining viewing figures

[andburg]

is it so hard to comprehend the viewing figures dropping?

2015 to view all season you need sky sports
BBC shows 6 live races
cheapest way of getting sky sports currently is original bundle+ sky sports at £45/m

Now I love F1 but I wont pay £20/month on top of any sky bundle when I wont watch anything else they show!

Luckily I'm on an old package where I get sky sports F1 HD as part of the HD-Pack

Surely the answer is for Bernie et-al to demand Sky offer F1 as a standalone channel?

[marshalla]

andburg said:

Surely the answer is for Bernie et-al to demand Sky offer F1 as a standalone channel?

Remind me - how much is F1 paying Sky these days ?

[andburg]

Sky won't be signed over the rights on a carte blanch do what you want with it fashion. Bernie will have something in there to say hat they can and cant offer/charge I'm sure.

If they price out half his audience he's the one losing value to advertisers, sponsors.

[Chrisgr31]

I think part of the issue with viewing figures is that a large number of free to air viewers decided that they were not going to pay Sky. They are therefore restricted to the BBC. For half the races they only see recorded highlights. They get used to that. Then of course before they see the highlights they find out the result, now theres no need to watch the highlights. Then ahh but many races I dont see live, so it doesnt matter if I miss this live race, I'll catch the highlights, then oh I know the result etc

[FW18]

Potential for the future?

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2015/12/09/big-hor...

[whatxd]

What about oversees? I read that viewing figures on the whole are falling across the globe. Do Sky have global TV rights or is just in UK/ Europe?

[FW18]

Sky/Fox have a fair few deals with FOM, but so do other broadcasters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_...

[whatxd]

FW18 said:

Sky/Fox have a fair few deals with FOM, but so do other broadcasters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_...

Certainly pay tv isn't helping and I was surprised by how many countries (or lack of) get free broadcasts of races. The problem F1 has is that it isn't interesting enough for people to go out of their way and pay for it on the the strength of its own product.

Take me as an example, I have the entire Sky Sports package because I want to watch the football and for me the F1 channel is "just there". I purchase Sky Sports because I want the football, not F1.

If I didn't care about football, I would not purchase Sky Sports just to get the F1 channel. Maybe you can buy the F1 channel alone without the football, I don't know, but it certainly doesn't help F1 if you need to purchase all of the sports channels to get the F1 coverage.

[SPS]

As usual these "drivers" of the dual brands Sky (Murdo) & F1 (Eccles) push to the limit and then suddenly realize that they have pushed too far and the sponsors (money) start to kick up a stink! Offers will suddenly abound for yet more "fantastic" packages/bundles and then Brano will probably be running too. Oh and lest we dare forget Amo prime trying to grab another shard of prime time rip off essence!
Most ordinary punters are getting sick to the back teeth of the money grabbing and in some case profiteering that these organisations very often aspire to.
Tbh I really gave up on F1 a fair few years ago, it's just so bloody boring for 90% of the races, the pre and post shows are more "exciting" now, and I do love motor sport a lot be it on two or four wheels.

[Scuffers]

might be out of date on this but was there not a clause in the teams agreements about being on FTA channels?

with the BBC dumping it 100% where does that leave it?

[Eric Mc]

"Live" coverage was never guaranteed on Free to Air.

[London424]

Are sponsors even bothered? I've not noticed a decline in sponsorship on the cars.

You've got the usual st teams struggling like they always have and the big boys at the front are plastered with stuff.

[Eric Mc]

I'm not so sure. Williams and McLaren aren't exactly festooned with logos - and McLaren particularly have lost some really big ticket sponsors of late. OK, neither team is at the peak they once were but they are still fairly big fish in the F1 pond.

Although F1 teams are very secretive about their finances, I wonder how the split between share of TV rights income and sponsorship income is compared to (say) 20 years ago.

[London424]

Eric Mc said:

I'm not so sure. Williams and McLaren aren't exactly festooned with logos - and McLaren particularly have lost some really big ticket sponsors of late. OK, neither team is at the peak they once were but they are still fairly big fish in the F1 pond.

Although F1 teams are very secretive about their finances, I wonder how the split between share of TV rights income and sponsorship income is compared to (say) 20 years ago.

McLaren are a piss poor team at the moment and have been for a good few years now, is it a surprise they have lost sponsors where Ron is charging them title winning rates?

Same thing happened with Williams, a non entity on the grid for a long time, now look how many companies that are sponsoring them

http://www.williamsf1.com/racing/about/our-partner...

[Scuffers]

Eric Mc said:

"Live" coverage was never guaranteed on Free to Air.

not the point.

hard to pick up sponsors if the coverage is severely restricted.

view figures drop, advertising rates plummet.

[marshalla]

We need to get back to action like this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfchbxFoaOY

[Eric Mc]

Scuffers said:

Eric Mc said:

"Live" coverage was never guaranteed on Free to Air.

not the point.

hard to pick up sponsors if the coverage is severely restricted.

view figures drop, advertising rates plummet.

Agreed, it's not the WHOLE point. But it is PART of the point. Restricting the ability to view whether live or highlights will put some sponsors off.

[suffolk009]

You can guarantee that the teams will be losing sponsors if there is no free to air coverage. This will lead to Bernie having to "give" more money to the teams.

Any way you look at it the promoters have been too greedy, done too little and their business model has stalled.

[anonymous-user]

Typical really.

On terrestrial = huge viewing figures.
They try to make a killing and put it on sky/ppv
People give up due to lack of easy access

I gave up years ago, as a sport its almost as bad as the hype surrounding overpaid idiots kicking a pigs bladder around.

[Chrisgr31]

It would seem likely that if the number of viewers of F1 falls then the income from sponsors would fall. You might have the same number but logic says they would pay less.

The question then is dies the increase in oncome from TV rights achieved by going to pay TV more than cover the loss of sponsor I come for the teams? If the answer is yes then the teams won't be fussed by the move away from free to air.

Whether a move away from free to air is good in the long run, and whether that will impact the fan base in years to come is a different question argued on a different thread