I guess is depends on what amounts you need to cover the cost of production. I can't imagine that rallying is a cheap form of sport to produce coverage of.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
Printable View
I guess is depends on what amounts you need to cover the cost of production. I can't imagine that rallying is a cheap form of sport to produce coverage of.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
Sure but then you have to give the rights to someone who can produce it and put it on tv like Eurosport. Didn't see that MotorsTV produce any kind of show, they just buy the rights and put it on their program.
Don't know about that... Mexico was pretty bad. The helicam footage looked more like someone had stuck his mobile phone out of the window of the chopper than anything approaching professional. I guess they are on a pretty constrained budget though.. what is the current situation, are the FIA actually paying someone to produce this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9
I miss the North One TV and Paul King
at least they didn't cover the whole car's sound and co-driver's voice with their silly voice
Very frustrating. Surely WRC attracts better demographics to warrant something better. I have to say that the season highlights for sale on some DVD websites are just as terrible. All talk and no car porn. And about 7-13 mins on each rally. That is not enough. If the FIA can do WTCC surely they can do WRC better.
Eurosport is doing WTCC.
Interesting story on Autosport.com's PLUS site.
How world rallying was almost saved - AUTOSPORT PLUS
I quote the last part:
"As outlined at the top of this column, Sky was also seriously considering buying NOS and the administrator was confident a deal was coming, until the news firm got cold feet.
At this point, the administrators were issuing non-disclosure agreements to numerous interested parties and this is the first time we can find out who might have ruled our world.
Volkswagen, anybody? Having committed to the next five years in the WRC, the German car firm pondered a step further and VW was reckoned to be ready to underwrite NOS to the tune of �10m. A formal proposal was never received. Global sports promoters IMG was provided with a full financial picture of what was required, but declined to follow it up. It was the same story for energy drinks giant Red Bull.
From my perspective, Red Bull owning and promoting the WRC would have been a perfect fit, given the extreme nature of our sport, the massive potential for new-media exposure and Red Bull's desire and ability not to sponsor but to buy and own the means of exposure.
Venture capitalist Genii � one-time owner of what is now known as Lotus F1 � made an informal offer of �1m for the lot. That offer was rejected.
Time was called, the doors closed and a gilt-edged opportunity was lost."
Well, there must be a reason that they all declined to follow through with their interest.
Sky Sports offered £8,000,000 to become the promoter and supply t.v coverage to the championship.I believe it wanted a 3 year contract but the FIA rejected it because Sky wanted more control than they was prepared to give away.Sky Sports have been impressed with viewing figures of the BRC championship showned on there network,and thought WRC rallying would complement there new coverage of F1 in u.k. I know pay tv is not popular with some people but Sky always do a fantastic job with there coverage and i believe would of been fantastic for the WRC.