I reckon it all hinges on how much they are paying "The Three Musketeers" who cover F1 for the BBC.
MB, EJ and DC cannot be cheap.....................
Presumably they'll still be paying them next year for the 10 races the BBC do cover?
BBC to axe F1 from 2013? Confirmed - F1 will be on Sky from 2012
- Thread starter Quintessentially
- Start date
- Status
Presumably they'll still be paying them next year for the 10 races the BBC do cover?
Out of the choice of C4 and Sky I do prefer the Sky option as long as they honour their agreement not to show ads during the race.
But does the majority?
Do you subscribe to Sky Sports already though?
My 1st choice and probably the same for most of us would be for the coverage to stay exactly as it is now. As we don't have a choice in the matter we might as well get the best deal possible for us fans. Even though it is going to cost us a pretty penny do we really want to see a return of races been ruined by adverts?
I don't and I still don't have a regular job but I'm looking into the cheapest way of getting my F1 through Sky. Possibly through BT who I already subscribe to for my phone and internet.
Not really, as I don't currently intend to subscribe to Sky Sports. I already cancelled my Sky Movies subscription to save money.
Is that what they've spent on the new television centre? That's a lot of money, but it would have been committed to before the costs cuts and it's not just the building but all the infrastructure that needed updating (new HD equipment etc.).
I really don't think the BBC are the ones we should be blaming. I can see the logic behind the decision they've made from a BBC perspective. I imagine it went something like this:
If you are looking for someone to blame I think there are two places to look:
I really don't think the BBC are the ones we should be blaming. I can see the logic behind the decision they've made from a BBC perspective. I imagine it went something like this:
- F1 has good viewing figures, two British drivers and many British based teams. We want F1 on the BBC.
- We can't afford to continue the F1 contract at the current price. How can we keep it?
- Sky are interested but the conorde agreement states there must be free-to-air coverage. Maybe we can form a partnership?
- We can make a deal to show half the races live, and highlights for other races, at less than half the price whilst also reducing prodcution costs.
- No F1 on the BBC vs. Half the season live on the BBC until 2018. Half the season wins.
If you are looking for someone to blame I think there are two places to look:
- Cost Cuts - Blame this on the government or the banks.
- Bernie/FOM - For accepting and negotiating the deal.
As an Arsenal fan, if I saw we were paying another 2m for Fabianski, yes, I would be worried
Serious post to come - couldn't resist a moment of humour after reading all 18 pages on this that have been written in the last 2 days
This is how I see it
1. Beeb turned around and said "not a penny more", can't justify license fee, blah blah.. FOM said how about your 50m for 2012 takes you through to 2018, but you have to let Sky in the door
2. Sky coughs up 40m a year, meaning essentially zero sum for FOM.
3. teams say, we need free to air
4. FOM says to teams, no concorde agreement, you can't stop us
5. teams dumbfounded.... no beeb = no free to air.
6. FOM says look you can stretch free to air until 2018 with full length highlights at 1pm every race day and we will still have the same revenue
7. but we will only let beeb do full length highlights if you sign a new concorde
8. and by the way stop asking for more revenue share from TV because as you can see the pot is shrinking
1. Beeb turned around and said "not a penny more", can't justify license fee, blah blah.. FOM said how about your 50m for 2012 takes you through to 2018, but you have to let Sky in the door
2. Sky coughs up 40m a year, meaning essentially zero sum for FOM.
3. teams say, we need free to air
4. FOM says to teams, no concorde agreement, you can't stop us
5. teams dumbfounded.... no beeb = no free to air.
6. FOM says look you can stretch free to air until 2018 with full length highlights at 1pm every race day and we will still have the same revenue
7. but we will only let beeb do full length highlights if you sign a new concorde
8. and by the way stop asking for more revenue share from TV because as you can see the pot is shrinking
If they broadcast it on Sky Sports 1 I could watch it, but not if it were on 2, 3 or 4 for which I would have to shell out another £8/month.
Compared to keeping F1 on the as it was before they've reduced their spend for 2013 to 2018 from £300 mil + production costs, to £120 mil + significantly lower production costs.
The BBC will have a per year budget, and if it works like other government funded things such as schools, they may not be able to keep any of that budget that they don't spend. So what really matters is the yearly figures, which are greatly reduced - £30 mil saving for 2012 and then £20m per year from then which they must see as an amount they can afford. They have increased their spending compared to not having F1 at all, but it seems to me that they really wanted to keep it on the BBC but have been forced into a corner by spending cuts.
I can't see the races being split across two channels, except perhaps in strange circumstances like the BBC have done in the past. The channels question is more of an issue and I think rather than Sky Sports 1,2,3,4 they should have Sky Sports Football, Motorsport, Cricket etc. They'd proabably make less money that way though so it won't happen.
The BBC will have a per year budget, and if it works like other government funded things such as schools, they may not be able to keep any of that budget that they don't spend. So what really matters is the yearly figures, which are greatly reduced - £30 mil saving for 2012 and then £20m per year from then which they must see as an amount they can afford. They have increased their spending compared to not having F1 at all, but it seems to me that they really wanted to keep it on the BBC but have been forced into a corner by spending cuts.
I can't see the races being split across two channels, except perhaps in strange circumstances like the BBC have done in the past. The channels question is more of an issue and I think rather than Sky Sports 1,2,3,4 they should have Sky Sports Football, Motorsport, Cricket etc. They'd proabably make less money that way though so it won't happen.
It's become clear over the weekend that there were other offers on the table and it was the BBC who brought Sky onboard and then approached Ecclestone to re-negotiate the deal. Ecclestone himself has been saying this since Friday. He claims that it was the BBC who brought Sky to him and not the other way around. It would appear that Channel 4 did make a bid but wouldn't confirm or were unable to start from 2012 but instead from 2013 (the original end date of the BBC contract) and also Channel 5 would have been looked at but they never made a bid. The bulk of this story appeared in an article on ESPN yesterday.
So if this really is the case, and the BBC did go to Sky first in order to have the best of both worlds, an extended contract and to keep some of their F1 coverage at the expense of every one else then it really does make this story so much worse !!!
So if this really is the case, and the BBC did go to Sky first in order to have the best of both worlds, an extended contract and to keep some of their F1 coverage at the expense of every one else then it really does make this story so much worse !!!
Is that not a contradiction in terms?
I can't believe that the BBC have committed to a 6 year deal on a sport where they have fundamentally changed the viewers/fans ability to follow the series.
If viewing is maintained, it'll probably be through Sky, if it drops off they've just committed £20m a year on a lemon. This sounds more like a decision made in ladbrookes rather than round a board table.
If viewing is maintained, it'll probably be through Sky, if it drops off they've just committed £20m a year on a lemon. This sounds more like a decision made in ladbrookes rather than round a board table.
- Status
Similar threads
