Bad news, BBC to share F1 with Sky Sports - boo hiss boo!

I don't think Bernie is whom you should be directing your anger to, in this case.

The BBC had a contract until the end of 2013. The BBC were also the ones that suggested sharing the deal with Sky rather than them letting F1 slip to another free-to-air network. The BBC are the ones cutting cost on F1 despite great value for money.

---

X (@ed24f1)

As much as I want to blame Bernie for this one, it isn't his fault. BBC broke the contract with the insane budget cuts which have been forced through due to the piss-poor money management.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Murray Walker's view, confirms the real bad guys are the bankers and Labour Party for over spending in the last 13 years.

[news.bbc.co.uk]

no, it's global warming

Interesting article

[www.sabotagetimes.com]

---

Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions

Ferrari2007 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting article
>
> [www.sabotagetimes.com]
> orts-will-financially-cripple-formula-one/


whilst it makes some good points a lot of it is the standard rant thats been copied and pasted from blog to blog since last friday.

however you try and dress it up, 'half of everyone watching TV was watching the F1' still only equates to between 4-5m people. a drop to 2-3 million (and lets not forget this only affects the uk) is not going to bother Santander, vodafone, etc in the slightest.

i'm very sad to see it go to sky, but at the same time, i'm just stunned its taken as long as it has.

I am more inclinded to believe Murray that this really is the begining of the end for free to air F1. He starts off positive in that the bbc are doing the best they can with a smaller budget but later conceeds that pay per view is the way it is going to go within the next 5 years of so, just like the cricket and the football. The bbc spokesperson verermently denies this, but then they would wouldn't they to try to deflect the flack.

Interestingly if 100,000+ people sign a petition at the House of Commons this (or any other subject like the death penalty for eample) has to be consider for a debate in the chamber. So I'd say sign the petition now.

Lastly, what is the TV right situation in other European Countries? Last year when I was in spain the F1 Australian GP was on two channels at the same time with plenty of ad breaks but with a box in the corner of the screen showing live action (if I remember right).

AFAIK the TV channels in Europe which show sports do tend to keep showing the live action through the ad breaks via an inset, as you say, and it's the obvious best way of doing things. It's one of the areas where ITV screwed up. But I'd imagine Sky won't be doing it either.

---

the thing is for 50% of the races skys coverage is going head to head with the beeb. (who we know won't have adverts)
so sky putting adverts in those races would surely be pointless as it just means even those with sky will watch the race on the bbc?

Berine is making £25 million extra out of this deal.

BBC pay £40 million at the mo and will pay £20 million. Sky will pay £45 million so please do not tell me this is not about money.

If Bernie really wanted to keep this on free to air he would have lowered the price.

I have already said on another topic that I will not pay £36 a race which is what it will work out to watch the 10 races live that the BBC wont cover.

We dont even know what the team will be next year on either channel.

For the 1st time since I have been watching F1 I will not be able to watch a race live on normal TV.

People said the same about football and the other sports Sky show, but come one there are more than 20 matchs a year so you get your monies worth. But £30 a month for 10 races is just not on, plus no pre or post show for that you need to watch Sky Sports News.

BBC pay £40 million at the mo and will pay £20 million. Sky will pay £45 million so please do not tell me this is not about money.

It is about money. It's about the BBCs money.

If Bernie really wanted to keep this on free to air he would have lowered the price.

The deal was already done. Bernie doesn't have to do jack sh*t. If the BBC couldn't afford it, they shouldn't have entered into the contract.

Have you even read anything about the BBCs issues? Why is everyone running around crying about F1 when this is completely down to the BBC and how it has handled our money? No other country is having a similar issue. Nothing has changed from F1s side, only the BBCs. As license payers, we should be demanding an investigation into how the BBC has created this issue and had to make massive cuts. Was it spending our money on stuff it couldn't afford, and now we, the license payers are losing out? I'm paying almost £150 a year, and they have cut the most popular sporting broadcast they have, in order to save BBC3? And we're sitting here whining about f**king Bernie again, like every week? BBC must be thanking god that too many people aren't blaming them.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Well said.

---

X (@ed24f1)

DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have you even read anything about the BBCs issues?
> Why is everyone running around crying about F1
> when this is completely down to the BBC and how it
> has handled our money? No other country is having
> a similar issue.

That is not true. We completed this exact movement a few years ago here in Denmark.

First the public service free-to-air broadcast channel Denmarks Radio (DR) had the rights. They had them for years. Then they came into financial trouble (because of entirely unrelated matters), and lost the bid to the other free-to-air commercially funded channel TV2. They then moved the coverage to their sports channel TV2Sport, which is not free-to-air. No ads during the show on either channel though. Then they came into financial trouble, and sold off half of the channel and half of the contract to Viasat, who broadcasted first through 3Puls, and now 3+. Both channels run adverts during the show, and are rather expensive to acquire. To be fair Viasat show all the components (qualifying and free practice), and do some in-depth reporting both before and after the races, which is on a similar level to that which RTL or BBC put together. They do run 4-6 ad breaks during each broadcast, which is a nuisance. TV2Sport is now Viasat TV2Sport, and runs either a highlight broadcast (race only) or a delayed broadcast. The old TV2 deal had nothing like the journalistic backing of the Viasat coverage, but they ran GP2 (and F3000 before that) and the Porsche Supercup. This was later sold off to Eurosport. Viasat do not do this.

I have to pay for these channels. It runs up to some 35£ a month. I get a bunch of other channels with my F1 coverage, but my interest in them is slight. If there was a quality internet coverage of F1 available, I would seriously consider dumping my TV entirely.

As you can see from the flow of events here in Denmark, the BBC chain of events follows the exact same pattern. You are not the first country to experience this. Bernie followed a tried and tested solution to a problem related to funding, that he had experienced years before it hit the BBC. And license payments here are some 250£ btw.

---

It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 08/07/2011 10:47PM by Morbid.

From the horse's mouth - BBC F1 Boss Ben Gallop, followed by some interesting viewer comments ...

[www.bbc.co.uk]

Had the BBC been allowed to increase the license like they used to each year by £2 we would not even be talking about this. They signed the contract before the idiots in power blocked the increase so they would not have known they would not be able to afford it.

I agree that they should drop BBC3 and channels that are not watched so they can provide things we do want to watch.

I am sure most people would rather pay the BBC £4 more a year than having to pay Sky over £30 a month!

Yes the BBC messed up but no way should F1 be on Sky, so many true fans just cannot afford it so we are going to lose out.

I know people are defending Bernie, but he is making over £20 million extra from this deal. Weather or not people buy Sky or whatever he is still going to get his money so why would he care.

Quote
marcl
I am sure most people would rather pay the BBC £4 more a year than having to pay Sky over £30 a month!

The problem is, most Sky subscribers aren't subscribing just for a single show - they subscribe because they're a TV-aholic who watch quite a bit of non-terrestrial TV, and/or are big sports fans who want football, cricket or rugby. Certainly the former of those attracts quite a few viewers, and I'd be one of them if I bought into the whole Sky thing, but I just don't watch anywhere near enough TV to justify paying £500 (SD) or £600 (HD) for Sky as well as £145 for the TV license.

To be honest, all I do watch is the F1, football if there's a decent match on free-to-air, Top Gear and the odd crime drama. I can't even justify the TV license let alone Sky.

Love the Nazi video! Genius.

Gav I am in the same situation as you.

Yes I do have Virginmedia, but there is no way I can afford an extra £30 a month just to watch F1 as I am not interested in football and the other rubbish on Sky Sports.

This might seem odd as I started this thread and was equally piss*ed off to start with, but I am trying to see the positive side and thinking that I'll get the most out of the 10 on the BBC and get out on sunday PM more often and stop being such an F1-aholic on those sunday. My family will be pleased. 20 races a year is an overdose anyway.