BBC vs Sky - The Story so Far

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

That is quite an interpretation you've come up with there. :rolleyes:

I didn't single any one person out, but more a blanket opinion I witness all over the internet when this topic is being discussed. I am yet to find a BBC viewer who thinks this is great to have two channels covering the sport. One with a minority viewership that costs silly money, and the other showing a cut down version to over four times as many viewers. I'm sorry but I'm sick of hearing how great it is because the sport get more money. Those that have the choice are able to have this perspective because it doesn't affect them and its easier to support something if you are benefiting. Where do people like me fit into that equation? A fan who spends an awful lot of time following the sport and discussing it but has to make do with only half the season live? Myself and millions of others have lost out big time and I will always be negative about this. I don't care if I sound like a broken record because the situation is unchanged and isn't likely to change anytime soon.

---

I understand that non-subscribers will feel aggrieved, it's totally understandable when the sport you love suddenly costs more to watch, but we have to accept that's the way sport in general is going. The BBC in particular have been squeezed by the licence fee settlement (I know, The Voice is costing £20 million, I don't get it either) and it's hard to justify F1 as a priority when other broadcasters were competing for the rights.

I don't appreciate the implication that I'm watching races from an ivory tower, scoffing caviar and lighting cigars with £50 notes while laughing at the poor unwashed who can't afford Sky - I'm simply being realistic about the cost of sporting rights. I can't stand caviar.

The viewing figures may seem disappointing, but the main channels have seen a general decline* in their figures anyway as more and more competition from other broadcasters, not to mention gaming and the internet, eat into their dominance. And to be honest, 4.66 million on a Sunday afternoon isn't actually that bad: that would put the F1 show on the cusp of BBC1's top 30 shows of the entire week.

(*PS, can you spot the Olympics / Paralympics on that graph?! :eek: )

Money my ass. If both Sky and the BBC were to stop paying for F1 it would have zero implications for F1 or teams finding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I am yet to find a BBC viewer who thinks this is great to have two channels covering the sport.

---

What about a Sky viewer who thinks its bad to have two channels.

Henners. I agree completely with your overall opinion on Sky. Its bad for F1 in the UK. I got the Sky coverage, because I already had it for Fooball, Cricket etc.

Dont forget there are some of us who watch F1 on Sky who want it all on the BBC in a real world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

I understand that non-subscribers will feel aggrieved, it's totally understandable when the sport you love suddenly costs more to watch, but we have to accept that's the way sport in general is going. The BBC in particular have been squeezed by the licence fee settlement (I know, The Voice is costing £20 million, I don't get it either) and it's hard to justify F1 as a priority when other broadcasters were competing for the rights.

I don't appreciate the implication that I'm watching races from an ivory tower, scoffing caviar and lighting cigars with £50 notes while laughing at the poor unwashed who can't afford Sky - I'm simply being realistic about the cost of sporting rights. I can't stand caviar.

The viewing figures may seem disappointing, but the main channels have seen a general decline* in their figures anyway as more and more competition from other broadcasters, not to mention gaming and the internet, eat into their dominance. And to be honest, 4.66 million on a Sunday afternoon isn't actually that bad: that would put the F1 show on the cusp of BBC1's top 30 shows of the entire week.

(*PS, can you spot the Olympics / Paralympics on that graph?! :eek: )

---

I find it hard to be realistic Dave I admit. Maybe in future years they will make the sport completely exclusive where you have to attend races to see it live with snippets on youtube for the die-hard fans? No TV coverage whatsoever would really push it into the boundaries and gain that luxury following it desires. Sounds completely stupid but I would have said the deal we have now is stupid if I was asked 5 years ago. I have no interest in following a sport I may end up having a very limited access to in the future. I stopped following football because it became increasing difficult to support a team through newspaper articles and the odd Champion's League match on a Wednesday night. Plus leaving school and no longer playing it meant my interest diminished. I couldn't tell you where Liverpool sit in the league now and never read the back pages of the newspaper. I still get excited if I catch the odd match, but can't justify my time to it anymore. If the BBC lose the rights to all live F1 I will reluctantly stop following, discussing, and reading about it. No point. I stopped watching F1 in 2002 when I went off to university and it became boring (IMO) during Schumacher's dominance. I came back to it for the 2005 season and have seen its popularity recover only for it to go this way. If highlights are pulling in top 30 ratings then that's great. I just want to watch 100% of every race without being ripped off. If I could afford Sky no doubt I would still be bitter about this but at least have some of the blow cushioned by the fact I still get to watch the races. Its easier to have a more 'realistic' perspective when you are unaffected.

I just hope the price continues to rise and we are faced with the sport back in its old place, unpopular. We've supported it going this way and we will have to deal with it I suppose. I'm having one of those days where I'm really angry about this and ranting. Apologies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveaki13

What about a Sky viewer who thinks its bad to have two channels.

Henners. I agree completely with your overall opinion on Sky. Its bad for F1 in the UK. I got the Sky coverage, because I already had it for Fooball, Cricket etc.

Dont forget there are some of us who watch F1 on Sky who want it all on the BBC in a real world.

---

I was well aware of your opinions on this from previous discussions. This is why I was surprised to see how you interpreted my post. Its not very often I read opinions like yours when you have the best of both worlds and its refreshing to read. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I was well aware of your opinions on this from previous discussions. This is why I was surprised to see how you interpreted my post. Its not very often I read opinions like yours when you have the best of both worlds and its refreshing to read. :)

---

Sorry Henners. It was just reading that line annoyed me a little, and I posted a bit too quickly. I understand you and others view. Trust me although I watch F1 on Sky, I am well aware that F1 in Britain is heading for a crash and that is sad. Considering how much of F1 is based in the UK. Regardless of where the money comes from. Most workers and things involved are British.

As I have said before If F1 can ever come back to BBC, it will be better for everyone and the sport. Which are the two most important things (The fans and the Sport)

Lets hope something can be done, because losing dedicated fans like Henners and others on here, wont do F1 any good.

I suppose I am technically a Sky viewer now as since the 9th of January this year I have lived in a house that has access to the Sky channel. Not for much longer though hopefully and I'll be in my new house. I have watched a couple of things in this time including the Malaysian GP. I chose not to watch the Oz GP as I wanted the BBC experience for the season opener.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'm having one of those days where I'm really angry about this and ranting. Apologies.

---

No apology necessary. You're passionate about your opinion and argue it eloquently.

Anyway, must go: my valet is here to top up my champagne. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

No apology necessary. You're passionate about your opinion and argue it eloquently.

---

If it comes across as passion that's good. To me its more frustration and desperation lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

Anyway, must go: my valet is here to top up my champagne. :p :

---

I might treat myself to some bread sticks and Bucks Fizz seeing as in two and half weeks time I will be rich in having the coverage fully live. I'll be a king like you gentlemen all too briefly :p

Looks like egg on my face, and Sky have introduced Entertainment Extra + as a means of viewing non movie and sport content in HD.

Resulting in the F1 channel residing in the sports package, although existing customers remain able to view F1 on the original HD package for the time being.

Today is the last day new subscribers can purchase Sky and take advantage of the HD pack for viewing F1. Indeed new customers after today will have to purchase the whole Sports pack to view F1 in future. They have their plateaued audience so it makes no difference to Sky.

A carefully edited video by the BBC but my respect for Lee has gone up after seeing this and what she wrote after the Oz GP concerning Kimi.

BBC Sport - Lotus driver Kimi Raikkonen gives BBC the cold shoulder

I'm a big fan of Kimi's driving but he can come across as arrogant and rude a lot of the time. He's never made any secret of his hatred for talking to the press, but its part of the job unfortunately for him. If I was Lee or the producer in charge I would refuse to interview him from now on. I get most of my answers from his on track performance and enjoy his wins without hearing what he has to say to be honest.

Interesting quote from Bernie a couple of days ago. He's had the opinion for a long time that viewing figures are not in the least bit important to Formula One, yet suggested a scheme to Sky to offer this:

Quote:

---

“I said [to Sky] you can guarantee that when you put a Sky box in the house, although it is only for F1, people are going to say ‘why can’t I watch the rest’ and they will sign up,” he said.

“Children will say ‘my friends at school watch this so why can’t we?’ Sky are very good with that kind of idea. It would use F1 to drive their subscriptions.”

---

Free F1 Sky boxes would drive subscriptions says Bernie Ecclestone | City & Business | Finance | Daily Express

Offering the sport for free to boost viewing figures with a little temptation along the way. I'm not surprised Sky declined to comment as its against their business principles. Perhaps offering the channel at a considerably reduced rate stand alone on freeview would get a few more people watching Mr Ecclestone?

Its comments like this that prove how important it is for F1 to remain on FTA.

A chap I work with told me this morning he believes Sky are in the process of starting to remove the F1 Channel (SSF1) from customers who do not have the full sports package. If true it means anybody who simply has the HD pack and was allowed to continue receiving the channel after the move to sports in April will lose the channel unless they pay the extra £20 a month. Been looking around and there is no official confirmation from Sky but its rumoured amongst users on Twitter so this chap wasn't imagining things. The story has started from somewhere much like when they stopped offering it to new HD customers. It'll be interesting to see if there is any truth in it after all.

Lets face it its harsh and I would be mighty pee'd off if I had bought Sky for this one channel, only for it to be removed some months later but we have discussed this happening many times before. A friend of mine has done this and said although he's only 5 months into his contract, he'll remove Sky completely if they change the terms and conditions by taking this channel away. They do cover themselves by stating they can change these terms at any point and can raise the cost with little warning, but as a consumer you also have rights and can withdraw a service you have purchased at any point. Much like phone contracts, nothing is set in stone.

Expect audiences to fall further guys and gals lol. Questions have already been asked after the first few races of the season as figures have dropped yet again and I wouldn't mind betting many F1 fans will not feel pressured into upgrading further. This begs the question, what power does Bernie have to terminate a contract with the likes of Sky if audience figures fall again to unreasonable levels? Sky don't care how many are watching and neither did Bernie until less people actually tuned in to watch. It would be interesting to see how the sport responds as this latest 'rumour' could inflict quite a bit of damage to the sports popularity in the UK IMO. :)

I think that's just speculation, after all it's a natural conclusion to reach after they moved it onto the sports pack. Whatever happens I can't see any changes for this year. But for next it's quite possible.

I still wouldn't be subscribing to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

I think that's just speculation, after all it's a natural conclusion to reach after they moved it onto the sports pack. Whatever happens I can't see any changes for this year. But for next it's quite possible.

I still wouldn't be subscribing to it.

---

Oh its speculation at this stage. The rumours turned out to be right about the change in April and perhaps there is no smoke without fire concerning this latest rumour? I can't see Sky making any changes during an F1 season as that would be very stupid for marketing reasons. Plus there was a lot of advertising including an official Sky promotion twitter account to try and raise subscriptions amongst F1 fans in the run up to the SS switch. They couldn't exactly take it off those people after a couple of months I wouldn't have thought. Like yourself Mark I'm guessing the changes will come at the end of this year with perhaps a little bit of notice in the meantime. People like my friend who took out a subscription a few months ago will be able to cancel their subscription after 12 months anyway. Something he was considering.

I'm having FreeSat installed soon as I can't get more than 12 freeview channels where I now live unfortunately. We phoned a few companies to quote for TV, Phone and TV and Sky could do no better than £36 a month all in. With FreeSat its a one off payment and installation (£230), and we can get a faster Broadband deal with our old Supplier TalkTalk for £20 a month. Sky aren't attracting people because they simply aren't competitive and taking services like the F1 channel off existing customers doesn't do them any favours whatsoever. With the amount of complaints and negative publicity they've had, you'd think they'd at least try and reach out to F1 fans to get them on board, but its just an impressive edition to their portfolio and I really hope it gets taken off them. We've tried having F1 on pay TV, it hasn't worked and is a failed experiment. Audience figures are dropping off, Bernie is applying pressure and unrealistic suggestions to give people Sky for free which isn't in their model, and he's locked in a long term contract with them. I have to chuckle to myself as we all knew this was going to happen, although it has happened a lot sooner than I'd hoped. :)

tbh I'm finding that especially now the weather is a bit nicer, my weekends are absolutely packed and just don't have time to sit down and watch a Grand Prix live. So highlights are ideal. If I thought I could save some money by downgrading now I'd consider it.

Stupid decision to take F1 off freeview. I would love to see how Bernie really feels about all this.

I would say if Bernie gets his money he probably wouldnt care, but if its affecting other sectors of his F1 pie, he is gonna be getting mad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

tbh I'm finding that especially now the weather is a bit nicer, my weekends are absolutely packed and just don't have time to sit down and watch a Grand Prix live. So highlights are ideal. If I thought I could save some money by downgrading now I'd consider it.

---

I'm with you there Mark. The Monaco race had poor viewing figures on Sky with a peak tuning in for the highlights on the BBC and I'd put that largely down to the weather. It was one of the hottest days do far this year and I doubt many people were going to waste it just to watch a live race. I've just moved in to a brand new house with plenty to do including getting ready for a little one in October. I think it's highly likely my commitment to the sport and places like this are going to diminish somewhat, but that's life. I'll no doubt pick my interest up again a few years down the line and hopefully F1 will still be covered by a FTA channel.

Sky making it more expensive to existing viewers and no longer offering it as part of the HD pack is just putting people off. I'd rather save the money and use it for more important activities with the family.

It's not official they are taking the F1 channel off non sports subscribers, but its been expected and rumours are gathering some weight. I feel sorry for those more committed than me and who also have a limited disposable income. As long as Bernie gets paid eh? :)

The whole situation at the moment is a "be careful what you wish for" scenario.

People want it back free-to-air. So, do you want standard of ITV coverage back again - you know, where we witnessed exciting races totally ruined by adverts (San Marino 2005!!!!) - or should I say exciting adverts ruined by F1...(in ITV's eyes).

What we have now works for me. Realistically the cost per month is a very, very cheap utility bill if you already have a Sky subscription. I think a lot of people don't watch it on Sky out of pure pride.

I currently watch both! BBC if it is on live on both, and Sky if not, then watch highlights. Although for Monaco, I was away so watched the BBC highlights straight away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bezza

People want it back free-to-air. So, do you want standard of ITV coverage back again - you know, where we witnessed exciting races totally ruined by adverts (San Marino 2005!!!!) - or should I say exciting adverts ruined by F1...(in ITV's eyes).

---

I think it would be a mistake giving the coverage back to ITV at the price of reduced quality. The BBC have done a fantastic job and are recognised for increasing F1's level of popularity over the past 4 and half seasons. They couldn't justify the extortionate amount Bernie and Co demand for coverage and had no choice but to either drop it completely or share it. In an ideal world Bernie would have offered it to them at a reduced price seeing as they give the sport the exposure it deserves, something Sky are incapable of doing due to their outreach. At the time money was more important and Sky were willing to pay the premium even if many of us could see that viewers were going to drop considerably. Now we have a situation where Bernie is being forced to go back on some of his earlier smug comments and admit the drop in viewers is perhaps a problem after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bezza

What we have now works for me. Realistically the cost per month is a very, very cheap utility bill if you already have a Sky subscription. I think a lot of people don't watch it on Sky out of pure pride.

I currently watch both! BBC if it is on live on both, and Sky if not, then watch highlights. Although for Monaco, I was away so watched the BBC highlights straight away.

---

What we have works for anybody who already had Sky or were rich enough to upgrade. There are a large number of fans who have chosen not to receive Sky based on their principles but there are many others who enjoy watching the sport but simply can't afford it. At present I don't pay anything to watch TV apart from the license fee. I don't have a monthly subscription to any cable or satellite service, therefore the jump to Sky would be a £40 a month bill, which I can't justify for 10 races a year nor can I really afford it. That also isn't a 'very, very cheap utility bill' for some of us. I get every channel I desire apart from the F1 channel. If Sky offered this one channel for a limited fee (£10 a month) I think they would steal much of the die-hard fans amongst us. As it stands greed has taken over and they are in the process of restricting the channel even further. No longer offering it to new HD customers and perhaps taking it off customers who once had it. I can't even say I think their coverage is streets ahead of the BBC because it isn't. I know quite a few people who have the channel but watch the BBC when live without question. That must indicate Sky have failed somewhat and you only have to look at the viewing figures when both channels have the race live to see they lose viewers. I read somewhere that Monaco figures were down compared to recent years. The weather and the fact the BBC didn't have it live were obvious reasons. Sky had an average of 560k with the BBC getting 3.13m peaking at 4.16m. It didn't give a peak for Sky. That is massive and something is going to have to be done about it.

Its a right mess and finally its being realised by the powers that be. Sky don't care because as far as they are concerned they have a multi year contract and its just another channel in their sports portfolio. The BBC may have reduced coverage but they are still the primary choice for viewing F1 in the UK and are most important in terms of out reach. Its very easy to defend the present deal when it doesn't affect you too. If by a miracle the BBC are given back the exclusive rights at a discount, I do hope they keep the current line up. I'd hate to see the likes of Kravitz and Brundle automatically taking their old jobs back. I was very bitter about all this in the early days but I have bigger distractions in my life now, but would be lying if I said I didn't take some pleasure in seeing this agreement fail somewhat. My interest will naturally dwindle over the next few years but that's life. If the sport feels it can turn itself into a specialist interest event with only 500k followers in the UK and survive, then good luck to them. Its going much the same way as cricket and boxing but with an outlay that's huge and sponsorship is more important than ever. Time will tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

tbh I'm finding that especially now the weather is a bit nicer, my weekends are absolutely packed and just don't have time to sit down and watch a Grand Prix live. So highlights are ideal. If I thought I could save some money by downgrading now I'd consider it.

---

That's why I wish Bernie would stop tinkering with start times to "suit" a European audience. I actually like having early morning races, or an evening one like the upcoming Canadian GP, so it leaves the main part of the day free.

For Monaco, btw, we stuck a telly and a laptop in the garden and enjoyed the best of both worlds :D

That might be one bonus of all the European countries selling out to satellite tv companies, the majority live audiences will be in the Far East. It'll be better for those lucky enough in Europe to get the coverage because all the races will be tailored to suit china ie early mornings. Mark can sell this forum to a Chinese consortium for a tidy profit and we can reminisce about the good old days, when we are not getting sun tans.

It seems Sky have 'officially denied' that they are taking the F1 channel off HD subscribers:

Quote:

---

UPDATE on June 3rd – Sky have officially denied that there will be any package changes for current customers regarding Sky Sports F1.

---

Are current Sky

That's either a massive relief or confirmation it will happen at the end of the season depending on which way you look at it. They officially denied the F1 channel was being made part of the Sports Package in June last year.

Good news for Sky viewers:

Quote:

---

*Sky TV prices will increase on 1 September. In accordance with our standard terms, prices may rise by up to 10% in the initial contract term.

---

It is 'your home of Formula One' so is more than worth the extra money IMO. I am shocked by how much it has risen in just 13 months though. You could watch F1 for £31.25 p/m in April 2012. Now you have to subscribe to Sports and later will have to include the price hike into the equation. I'll pass lol. :D

And you wonder why people aren't so bothered about F1 any more. Bernie and Sky have a lot to answer for.

This is pretty much unsuprising.

F1 is being ruined on and off track.

Poor show really.

This is exactly what everyone predicted would happen when the deal was announced. I watched Sky's full coverage of the Monaco GP this year at my parents' and was less than impressed, certainly would feel like I wasn't getting value for money if I was paying for it.

I kind of feel sorry for the Sky presenters in this situation. All the promises of this exclusive channel and exciting new features and they are barely scraping a quarter of the overall viewers. People like Brundle were instantly recognisable for their roles as F1 broadcasters, but are in danger of falling into the category of the forgotten ones within a few years. I suppose I don't really feel sorry for them as such, they chose this for themselves.

I just hope the Beeb don't give up completely on F1. If it remains like it is I think it's fan base will continue to either maintain or grow. Sky's is falling and will no doubt fall again by next season and it'll be down to Bernie to decide whether fans watching is important after all. This social media and mobile device rubbish is not the way fans want to watch. You can't get into a sport like F1 unless you are seeing the whole race. The sooner they realise that the better.

You do find it hard to see F1 being able to carry on like this for the long term. I mean in 5 -10 years can Sky F1 still hold all the cards?

I think alot will depend on who controls F1 after Bernie goes to the large money pot in the Sky.

Alot of F1 could change after that and this is an issue that may need to be resolved.

It could be worse: it could be going to BT and disappearing from both terrestrial TV and Sky package channels entirely, like MotoGP.

Just watched the Sky highlights and BBC highlights to compare, and realized how bad David Croft has become!! Absolutely woeful. He sounded bored all race, despite it being a thriller. They missed Vettel conking out, because they were going to Kravitz AGAIN, and then Croft didn't seem to know what was going on. He failed to capture the excitement of the moment completely.

In contrast, watching it on the BBC was a pleasure. Edwards and Coulthard caught the moment perfectly and eloquently.

Leading me to think watching BBC highlights is better than watching the live races on Sky...

I had a bit of a nightmare on Sunday as I set my father in laws Sky box to record the GP on BBC 1HD. Got home around 5pm hoping to tune in and the flaming thing hadn't recorded it! I logged in to iPlayer and waited until gone half 7 before the highlights came online. I had missed the start on the TV so watched highlights online. For some reason they didn't release the full race re-run on iPlayer until the highlights had finished. As it happened the highlights were good enough anyway.

I can't say I've bothered too much with Sky at all this season. I've lived in a house since Christmas that has had full access to the channel but as I've said countless times, I think the BBC do it so much better and will watch them as first choice every time. Suzi has got a lot better, although she still fluffs the odd line. Its still only her third live broadcast so I think she needs more time. I can live with her making a few mistakes as she's quite a warm character and it doesn't bother me so much. Plus from past experience you know when she is comfortable in a role, she is a damned fine presenter.

I've seen a few discussion lately about drivers being particularly cold towards Brundle on grid walks. He used to get some quite rude responses long before his cash dash, but it seems Vettel in particular is brief with him. Was it Austin last year where he snubbed Brundle live on air when he tried to interrupt DC's interview with the 'but we are live David'...? lol. Anyway, the Beeb did a fantastic job last weekend with my particular highlight being DC driving Jim Clarks Lotus. What a segment. Loved the old mechanics sharing their stories and the enthusiasm on DC's face. Towards the end you could tell he had forgotten the camera's were rolling and was simply caught in the moment. Brilliant stuff. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Suzi has got a lot better, although she still fluffs the odd line. Its still only her third live broadcast so I think she needs more time. I can live with her making a few mistakes as she's quite a warm character and it doesn't bother me so much. Plus from past experience you know when she is comfortable in a role, she is a damned fine presenter.

---

Can't say that I agree. As likeable as she is at times Suzi Perry is getting on my nerves. At times she seems utterly clueless, not paying attention and it seems half the time on air she seems bewildered and struggling/hurrying her lines.

So its a no, she is not getting a better at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

Can't say that I agree. As likeable as she is at times Suzi Perry is getting on my nerves. At times she seems utterly clueless, not paying attention and it seems half the time on air she seems bewildered and struggling/hurrying her lines.

So its a no, she is not getting a better at all.

---

That's fine wedge, our opinions are all subjective. I've noticed a noticeable improvement from my point of view and openly admit her likeability means I am not as critical or perhaps notice the mistakes as much as others. I prefer the laid back approach of the broadcast so the odd mistake gives it the human feel for me. DC fluffs his words more often than not and he is a knowledgeable contributor even if presenting is not his main profession.

Ben Edwards made a lot of mistakes in his commentary - one that sticks out in mind was "Lawrence Hamilton"!

But then one senses a sort of charm to his errors unlike say Toby Moody's efforts with BTCC.

I prefer BBC always. It sounds trustable to me. No close comparison yet.