# Formula 1 goes to Sky Sports & BBC



## phope (Mar 26, 2006)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 550930.stm

Good or a bad thing?



> The BBC and Sky Sports will broadcast Formula 1 in the UK between 2012 and 2018 under a new rights deal.
> 
> The BBC has been the exclusive broadcaster of F1 in the UK since 2009 but its contract with Formula One Management was due to expire after the 2013 season.
> 
> ...





> Races shown live on BBC TV will include the British Grand Prix at Silverstone, the Monaco GP and the concluding race of the season.


----------



## jonah (Aug 17, 2002)

With all the cut backs the BBC are having to make it's the best solution, BBC couldn't afford to bid for the whole F1 package, ITV weren't in the bidding so it would of either had to go to SKY completeley or be shared so this is probably the best outcome for joe public. Sky will probably do a good job at covering it and maybe bring some more to the table with regards live data ect using the red button.


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

Oh bloody hell! Yet more of our sporting heritage disappearing from free-to-air broadcasting.

I think a bit of greed results in a certain amount of short-sightedness in our sporting governing bodies. Selling to Sky as a highest bidder may bring more money in for the short term, but what does it do to the sport in the long term? Cricket may be better off financially right now but how much damage is it doing to the sport when many of our children never get to see any cricket at all on the TV other than short highlight programmes? It doesn't exactly help in encouraging future interest in the sport when there's so many people who never see it. And with the pinch coming and incomes being squeezed isn't your £50/month TV package going to be near the top of the list of things you can manage without?

I've always felt Sky buying the rights to show a particular sport is likely to be the start of declining popularity for that sport as its exposure inevitably becomes restricted. Maybe I'm biased as I refuse to pay for any TV so now get to see so little sport, but I bet even if I am in a minority it's a substantial one and growing.

It's bad news - always is.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Mark Davies said:


> I've always felt Sky buying the rights to show a particular sport is likely to be the start of declining popularity for that sport as its exposure inevitably becomes restricted. Maybe I'm biased as I refuse to pay for any TV so now get to see so little sport, but I bet even if I am in a minority it's a substantial one and growing.
> 
> It's bad news - always is.


I think technically, the 'growing' minority of people without pay tv is growing smaller, not larger. As for reduced exposure, this is probably more than balanced out by the fact that the BBC don't have a dedicated sports channel so can't show anywhere near as much of it as someone like Sky. I've not seen any evidence of Sky hurting any sport that it's taken on board. If anything, they seem to have the clout to make them more popular.


----------



## leenx (Feb 8, 2010)

Spandex said:


> Mark Davies said:
> 
> 
> > I've always felt Sky buying the rights to show a particular sport is likely to be the start of declining popularity for that sport as its exposure inevitably becomes restricted. Maybe I'm biased as I refuse to pay for any TV so now get to see so little sport, but I bet even if I am in a minority it's a substantial one and growing.
> ...


Sad country we live in where people without pay tv is growing smaller - esp after the latest Murdoch saga.


----------



## leenx (Feb 8, 2010)

"BBC Sport will broadcast half the races live, as well as the qualifying and practice sessions from those races"

How the **** does that work :lol: Can just see it now - last 10 laps and then switches to Athletics :lol:


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Spandex said:


> Mark Davies said:
> 
> 
> > I've always felt Sky buying the rights to show a particular sport is likely to be the start of declining popularity for that sport as its exposure inevitably becomes restricted. Maybe I'm biased as I refuse to pay for any TV so now get to see so little sport, but I bet even if I am in a minority it's a substantial one and growing.
> ...


Not a football fan then.


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

Bad thing IMO - no way am I forking out more money to Sky just to see the one sport I enjoy watching. Yet again, the money game gets in the way of bringing sport to the masses. How long before Sky want more of the pie and muscle out the BBC. Bye bye F1 for me and many others I fear :evil:


----------



## JNmercury00 (May 22, 2007)

wallsendmag said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> > Mark Davies said:
> ...


From memory I don't think he is.


----------



## STTink (Jun 28, 2011)

leenx said:


> "BBC Sport will broadcast half the races live, as well as the qualifying and practice sessions from those races"
> 
> How the **** does that work :lol: Can just see it now - last 10 laps and then switches to Athletics :lol:


Just in case you're not joking, half the races not half the race. Although that was what popped into my head too. Lol


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

JNmercury00 said:


> wallsendmag said:
> 
> 
> > Spandex said:
> ...


God, no...

That being said, has Sky hurt footballs popularity?


----------



## Nem (Feb 14, 2005)

Well I've been looking at changing the TV back to Sky from Virgin for a while, but that wasn't including the sports stuff, which I really don't care about.

Looking at the Sky sports packages, it's either £20 a month extra for all the sports, or £12 for either Sky sports 1 or 2.

So thats basically a minimum of £6 to watch each race!

Whats the betting they end up putting the live race on Sky sports 1 and they put qually and practise session on something like Sky sports 3 or 4 so you have to buy the full sports pack to watch it all?

This really is horrific!!


----------



## malstt (Apr 18, 2007)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOON !


----------



## jonah (Aug 17, 2002)

Nem said:


> Well I've been looking at changing the TV back to Sky from Virgin for a while, but that wasn't including the sports stuff, which I really don't care about.
> 
> Looking at the Sky sports packages, it's either £20 a month extra for all the sports, or £12 for either Sky sports 1 or 2.
> 
> ...


Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest and would be very underhanded if they did :?


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

I'm less of a football fan than I used to be; in part that's down to losing patience with toss-pot, prima-donna, overpaid Premiership footballers but also it's down to not being able to watch much football any more.

Premiership football is obviously the leader in what has become of British sport on TV. Clearly there is a demand to watch football that outstrips the supply of seats at the grounds. That pushes up ticket prices and so makes a TV subscription to watch football regularly a far cheaper option than going to see it live. The problem is, that model does not replicate through all other sports.There's not the same mass following, the support is not necessarily as partisan or fanatical and there's not often the same quantity of fixtures. That makes regularly paying a monthly subscription far less an attractive proposition for fans of other sports. I know plenty of football fans who have cancelled their Sky sports subscription over the summer to save money as they weren't interested in watching anything else. So, is it really worth a cricket fan going to the expense just for 4 months worth of coverage? Not for me.

I'd feel fairly confident that the viewing figures for English test matches are now far lower than they were when they were broadcast on the BBC. The same is likely to be the case with F1. For many people I don't think the expense is worth it and if they don't already have Sky they're not all that likely to get it. There's a core of people for whom TV really isn't all that important except for occasional viewing, perhaps of their favourite sports. It seems with these sports Sky are simply trying to hold us to ransom to force those not interested in paying for their other output to buy it anyway. The result however is always likely to be a loss of viewing and subsequent loss of support for the sport itself.


----------



## leenx (Feb 8, 2010)

Mark Davies said:


> I'm less of a football fan than I used to be; in part that's down to losing patience with toss-pot, prima-donna, overpaid Premiership footballers but also it's down to not being able to watch much football any more.
> 
> Premiership football is obviously the leader in what has become of British sport on TV. Clearly there is a demand to watch football that outstrips the supply of seats at the grounds. That pushes up ticket prices and so makes a TV subscription to watch football regularly a far cheaper option than going to see it live. The problem is, that model does not replicate through all other sports.There's not the same mass following, the support is not necessarily as partisan or fanatical and there's not often the same quantity of fixtures. That makes regularly paying a monthly subscription far less an attractive proposition for fans of other sports. I know plenty of football fans who have cancelled their Sky sports subscription over the summer to save money as they weren't interested in watching anything else. So, is it really worth a cricket fan going to the expense just for 4 months worth of coverage? Not for me.
> 
> I'd feel fairly confident that the viewing figures for English test matches are now far lower than they were when they were broadcast on the BBC. The same is likely to be the case with F1. For many people I don't think the expense is worth it and if they don't already have Sky they're not all that likely to get it. There's a core of people for whom TV really isn't all that important except for occasional viewing, perhaps of their favourite sports. It seems with these sports Sky are simply trying to hold us to ransom to force those not interested in paying for their other output to buy it anyway. The result however is always likely to be a loss of viewing and subsequent loss of support for the sport itself.


Perfectly put Mark and completely agree with your assessment of the Premierships "beautiful game" run by tosspots and played by bigger ones! 
I for one hope Sky and any other media who've jumped on this "pay per view" sport really take a hit and we eventually revert back to how it all used to be.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Football clubs run by toss pots don't know what you mean any examples spring to mind?


----------



## pas_55 (May 9, 2002)

wallsendmag said:


> Football clubs run by toss pots don't know what you mean any examples spring to mind?


Blackburn West Ham


----------



## leenx (Feb 8, 2010)

Chelsea, Newcastle, Man City, Man U, Shall I go on?


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

I wouldn't piss in Skys pot let alone put money in it


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

pas_55 said:


> wallsendmag said:
> 
> 
> > Football clubs run by toss pots don't know what you mean any examples spring to mind?
> ...


Finally something we can win


----------



## STTink (Jun 28, 2011)

Oh well. Still got the golf, darts, snooker and tennis.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

it is all as mark says,,, and i wont be buying into sky either,, maybe i can hack into it !!!!


----------



## meesterbond (May 4, 2011)

I think i saw something where they stated the cost to the BBC for buying the rights to broadcast this was somewhere between 40 and 50 million punds per season, and that based on the average number of viewers for the GP, it costs the BBC £1.50 per fan per race to screen the Formula One. So, if they've got half of the races and if you were to buy into Sky to see the "other half" of the races, that means you'd be paying for half of the season at £6 and half (dual coverage) at £7.50 ..... i stand to be corrected on that as it's Friday PM and my brain is frazzled!

On a non financial note, it really does seem a shame that a talented team ( aside of Eddie "i used to own" Jordan) which presents the coverage won't be getting the exposure they deserve. Always enjoy Brundles gridwalk, and pairing him with Coulthard in the commentary box seems to be working really well.

Of course, we can still hope that this is another of Bernies little games and that he does a U-turn, or at least partial, as he's been known to do historically!


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

aparently not finalised yet


----------



## jonah (Aug 17, 2002)

http://iphone.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/keepf1onthebbc

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

If you got broadband you wont be away from this site for sports

http://www.myp2p.eu/


----------



## Neil (May 7, 2002)

ahh, boll0cks :x

Am moving house shortly, and am going to ditch Sky, as I hardly watch it anymore, it's just £40+ wasted every month. I can't believe that I'll then miss half the F1 though!

Does than mean (assuming you've got Sky) we will be going back to the bad old days of adverts in the middle of the race? :?


----------



## jonah (Aug 17, 2002)

They say no adverts in race but pre and post there will be and the BBC will broadcast full race just not live, I don't see how Berni can say F1 will get more viewers though by going Pay TV?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Neil (May 7, 2002)

jonah said:


> and the BBC will broadcast full race just not live


aaahhh! 

Didn't realise that :roll:

Often record and watch in the evening anyway, so that's OK


----------



## Danny1 (Sep 2, 2010)

I can see mid race adverts making a comeback, SKY cant resist more mahoney!


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

Well that's the worst news. The BBC coverage (especially since they got rid of Jonathan Legard) has been the best. The commentary team are brilliant and Eddie Jordan is controversial enough to keep it spicy.

I will not purchase Sky to watch F1. Last time i had Sky it was for the qualifying coverage and I rarely watched anything else on it. Added to that a growing hatred of Rupert Murdoch and anything he has his dirty fingers into and it just goes against the grain for me to purchase any of his services again.

If I can find a free solution then that is the way to go... :wink:

Cheers

Rich


----------



## leenx (Feb 8, 2010)

rustyintegrale said:


> Well that's the worst news. The BBC coverage (especially since they got rid of Jonathan Legard) has been the best. The commentary team are brilliant and Eddie Jordan is controversial enough to keep it spicy.
> 
> I will not purchase Sky to watch F1. Last time i had Sky it was for the qualifying coverage and I rarely watched anything else on it. Added to that a growing hatred of Rupert Murdoch and anything he has his dirty fingers into and it just goes against the grain for me to purchase any of his services again.
> 
> ...


My thoughts entirely. I wish we all could boycott the con!


----------



## Dash (Oct 5, 2008)

Given the expense, I think it's for the best. I like the idea of the F1 being on the beeb, but realistically I usually forget and catch the highlights.

Just hope that it means some money being spent on decent programming.


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

Dash said:


> Given the expense, I think it's for the best. I like the idea of the F1 being on the beeb, but realistically I usually forget and catch the highlights.
> 
> Just hope that it means some money being spent on decent programming.


    WHAT ??????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

roddy said:


> Dash said:
> 
> 
> > Given the expense, I think it's for the best. I like the idea of the F1 being on the beeb, but realistically I usually forget and catch the highlights.
> ...


"I'm sorry London got bombed during the war, I was asleep and it all happened too early for me. I couldn't get to to my post in time..." :roll:

Bleedin' country is going to the dogs... :lol:


----------



## jonah (Aug 17, 2002)

Let's face it it's the best of a bad job and could of been worse if ESPN had got it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

