'T-lo' is crossdressing now? :confused: Say it ain't so! :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
Printable View
'T-lo' is crossdressing now? :confused: Say it ain't so! :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Giacomo Rappaccini
How many Identities is that now? :cool:
No need to worry about Sky.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
The beauty is that Sky only need relatively few subscribers to make it worth their while.
Also there's the knock-on effect that if they more or less monopolise live-sport on TV there will be less competition on Saturday/Sunday afternoon.
Better stop hoping and start saving because those who want to see live top sports in future will have to pay
I find the build up and post race stuff on Sky rather dull with far too much filler to pass the time between vital adverts. Why does a pay service that robs you of so much money a month use so many advert breaks? Of course its for the money and is why they post record profits year in year out. Lazenby asks questions on behalf of casual viewers yet they haven't realised by now that casual viewers are not their audience. You could understand it when Jake did it on the Beeb because they were attracting channel hoppers and new fans perhaps with limited knowledge, hence the increase in viewer-ship post 2009. Sky offer a lot more in terms of time on air but in terms of content I have to disagree that they bring more to the viewer. Just my opinion of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
I think the really telling stat is when the races are on both channels live. Sky experience a drop of nearly a third! They claim to have expected this but I can't believe they would be happy to lose viewers when they claim to offer a better service. Seeing fans run to the opposition suggests they are not as attractive an an overall package IMO.
Will the sponsors who plug millions into the sport think its a 'beauty' if the teams are being paid more but their products are reaching less people though? If anything the sponsors rely on casual viewers who stay on the channel long enough to see Santander in the background before they flick over to BBC 2 for Countryfile on a Sunday. Unless you are a serious fan you are not going to scroll through the sports channels on Sky to stumble upon the F1 channel. The beauty of it being on FTA was that any serious fan can watch the channel and others not interested will watch it for a few minutes after accidentally turning the channel on etc etc. Bernie used to say we didn't need a British GP because the real revenue was made by the sheer amount of people watching at home, now its suddenly unimportant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalie.S
Sky simply can't compete with other services in terms of offering value for money. I get so much advertising through the post trying to tempt me with deals but I would have to pay over £60 a month to get what I get now on Talk Talk. I pay less than half that, but of course that doesn't come with the F1 channel. I can upgrade for 30 day periods for £30 but I don't think Sky offer a good enough experience to warrant the price. There's only so much 'Your home of F1' preview shows I can watch to be honest when races are not on. If it completely goes off FTA I will either find an illegal way of viewing it or find another form of motorsport to invest my interests in. If Sky were not bothered about my custom they wouldn't post me marketing waffle or ring me occasionally to try and get me to subscribe. Unfortunately I don't claim benefits and live in a council house with several children. If I did I'd be able to get the tax payer to help me out on this lol. They need to be realistic about pricing and then they will have a chance of monopolising British television. They are a long way off as it stands and its no wonder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalie.S
Just an FYI to all, Lewis Hamilton will be on Top Gear tonight :) Can't wait to see what he does with the reasonably priced car in the dry this time :)
Forgot to record it, I will iplayer it tomorrow lol.
Teams care about the bottom line, if the pay TV option is more profitable then they will simply opt for different, perhaps less paying, sponsors if the current ones are not satisfied. Also sponsors don't care if you see their logos live or in highlights.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Also the demographic of people who pay to watch sports is quite interesting.
No point to advertise a Rolex to folk who even can't afford a few tenners a month to watch F1.
Sky does not have to compete, if you want to see everything F1 live, in full and in HD there's only Sky :)Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Indeed tamb which is why the sponsors we see on the cars and at races today are more in line with the high street rather than the luxury brands of some years ago. Sponsors may not care if you see their brands live or on highlights, but they do care when a million less viewers overall are tuning in. That will always be a cause for concern by basic logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalie.S
If you look at the demographic of Sky customers in the UK who pay to watch sports, its more in-line with the middle to lower class. They aren't all the high earners at all. For some priorities are very different and you'd be surprised how many people come to citizens advice and think their TV subscription is as necessary as their gas bill. If you think by slapping F1 on pay TV is suddenly going to weed out the poorer demographic of viewer and appeal to Rolex worthy customers, then I can't share that enthusiasm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalie.S
I believe they do have to compete otherwise they wouldn't send out so many mailings around the country and cold call people into subscribing. Yesterday they were at a stand on the entrance to my local ASDA store stopping people as they go in and out. Everybody has heard of Sky in the UK so for a company that doesn't have to compete, you have to wonder why so much is spent on marketing? One thing Sky are doing very well at is attracting people to their broadband packages. TV subscriptions may have been down on the expected in 2012 but the broadband side of the company has enjoyed an increase. The downside of that is they don't have the infrastructure to deal with it. Hence why they offer unlimited packages at a premium and cap the standard packages unlike their rivals. Sky have squeezed their rivals when others have wanted to offer their TV packages so these rivals through BT are squeezing Sky for fibre optic and cable rental with their broadband. Sky do have the trump card over many because they offer sports, but it comes at a premium and many like myself don't think its worth the price they ask. I'm annoyed I can't watch the F1 fully any more like most, but in the long run it'll be their loss not mine. The drop off will be a concern in future no doubt like it was in the past. Sports don't survive without interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalie.S
The domestic market is pretty inconsequential for major sponsors. Even the EU is a nice to have. Sponsors like Boss, Jonny Walker etc are creaming their pants about China, Russia and India. Strangely, three of the most recent races ;)
A couple of hundred thousand turning off in the UK vs giving the teams more revenue from PPV is a small trade off for the emerging markets.
Follow the money...
Its not a couple of hundred thousand though is it? As it stands its a million down on 2011 with only a minority choosing to watch on Sky. The BBC is still the primary channel for F1 in the UK and you take it off there then the figures for viewers in the UK looks very bleak indeed. If it really has got to the point where F1 really only cares about selling its sponsors products in the East rather than what is going on on the track, then I think you lot are mugs for paying for it. We're pushing the sport away and there seems to be plenty of support whether they know it or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
I'm assuming you watched it but in case you didn't don't read any further.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
I'm so glad that Hamilton beat Vettel's time. I know you can't compare them to a F1 car but he's so far ahead of the rest of the drivers with that time that it really shows to me he is one of the fastest drivers the sport has ever seen, if not the fastest, and he could beat Vettel any day of the week, in my opinion.
He just chooses not to, right? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
To put that another way, of the regular Sky F1 viewers, a two thirds majority prefer it to the BBC coverage even when they have a choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
That was my point a few pages back. We love to pretend the UK is still important, but it's the BRIC countries where the money is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
Of course Andy the flip side of the same statement effectively. When several million are watching the Beeb on that given weekend with Sky transmitting to 700k if they are lucky, it's still obvious FTA is always going to be hard to beat. That's just the basic mathematics of restricting the viewer base. Both channels have their positives and both do certain things better than the other, but the reality is the coverage is poorer than it has been pre 2012. The BBC had it nailed in every aspect, now it's diluted and padded out with filler as far as I am concerned. I'm sure those Sky fans amongst you will disagree with that but there we are.
There are also rumours this morning that new customers will only be able to access Sky Sports F1 through the full sports pack. New customers may not be able to opt for the HD package to gain access. Nothing is confirmed there but that can only be good news for Sky. Its always been a case of when rather than if in terms of how they offer the channel. Bad news for fans contemplating switching but not so bad if you've already subscribed. If the rumour is of course true, how long until its simply added for all involved?
Well that much was obvious that it was coming. I was half expecting it to be the case for all subscribers this year tbh. Despite having a years worth of Sky coverage my opinion is unchanged on the subject, that I'll still watch the BBC coverage when it's on, and I won't pay any extra to Sky to have live coverage.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Your stance isn't that uncommon either Mark. There are people like me who won't pay extra for HD, and there are those who didn't mind paying an extra tenner a month if it meant they got the F1. I've seen lots of people say that they'll drop it if it gets more expensive i.e added to the Sports package. Then again perhaps it makes sense to Sky because although they may lose half of their viewers again, the cost will be made up by those left paying the difference? I think they need to do it sooner rather than later so people don't get locked into contracts they don't wish to be part of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Nope, he just hasn't been provided the car with which he could do it yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by EuroTroll
I think the BBC is the preferred choice for most F1 fans in the UK. I certainly would rather have 2009-2011 coeverage for all to enjoy.
I enjoy Skys coverage and have no real reason miss BBC Coverage, but I think F1 is better as a whole if everyone possible can get access to it.
I suppose really it all comes down to what "Big E" decides he wants.
Big E has tried to get F1 off public channels for years. His latest success is that now the French have to pay extra, too. I think Germany and Austria are almost the last countries that have full coverage in free TV and I'm pretty sure he would love to see RTL and ORF lose the TV rights. You have to keep in mind that E gets the money from the broadcasters, not the viewers, so he couldn't care less how many people actually watch it, he only cares about whether or not Sky & Co cough up the dough.
From the perspective of sponsors free TV would be the better alternative, as it reaches more viewers, but the public broadcasters cannot fulfill E's ridiculous monetary demands.
I really hope that doesn't happen, as RTL is the only free source of live F1 coverage for many outside Germany as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
I think its only a matter of time before Germany follows the rest of Europe. Its sad for you guys having such a German influence in the Championship but the bottom line is Bernie doesn't care whether you are watching or not. It'll take a few years but the result of this greed will come back to bite them. It probably won't be in Bernie's lifetime and he'll go to his grave a very wealthy man. I just hope whoever takes over has a different perspective on how they want the sport to be perceived worldwide and wants it to be popular rather than simply a money maker. In ten years time are broadcasters going to be bidding big money for a sport that has slipped in popularity and draws only a fraction of its viewers in a previous era? Paying 80 or so million for a sport that is only going to attract a million or so viewers is not something broadcasters in the UK would pay for unless it was Sky of course. We have TV shows here that get dropped when they have only 3 million viewers and they cost considerably less to produce.
I have sky due to being a football fan, but BBC wins hands down in my opinion. Can't stand Simon lazenby I find him really dull! I loved Jake Humphrey and am a big Suzie Perry fan.
As you can tell by my name it's clear who's commentators I prefer.
The build up on sky is awful it's far too long and not very exciting but I loved the BBC build up its class.
Have the races for the BBC been announced yet? If so what are they.
I was just watching Sky Sports News and they were showing a table of all the drivers and Max had a cross of Saint George and Paul had a Union Jack!?! Lewis and Jenson always race under a Union Jack but why is Max racing under a cross of Saint George?
This morning Sky Sports News were doing a piece about Red Bull & showed a clip of a Toro Rosso pulling out of the garage. :dozey:
Well it looks like Sky Sports F1 is officially being added to the sports pack after all. Its been long predicted of course. Its good news for those already on the deal as it looks like they can't take the channel off you but those who haven't upgraded to HD or like me who haven't subscribed to Sky, it's suddenly become a whole lot more expensive.
Sky combines HD and 3D in new basic TV package: UPDATED - RecombuQuote:
Another change for new subscribers is that Sky F1 HD is now only available with a full Sky Sports subscription and HD booster.
Existing subscribers to the £10.25/month HD boost will still get Sky F1 HD without Sky Sports, and Sky said there are no plans to change that in future seasons.
Sky obviously made the F1 channel available through HD only in reaction to the uproar when the deal was first announced. It was a tempting way to get F1 fans to subscribe without having to pay the massive sum for the full sports package. Unfortunately for Sky nowhere near as many fans as they expected signed up for what they thought was a tempting offer. Adding it to the sports package makes little difference and now they can boost their ratings claims by saying '8 million viewers watch Sky Sports' rather than 'less than a million are watching our F1 channel'. I'm glad they have done this because it makes any future decisions for me a little more clear cut. :)
Well that's happened sooner than exepected but I'm glad I took out my HD sub when I did.
Yes likewise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
When they say "No plans to change" probably means we'll get the 2013 season, but come 2014 we'll have to pay..
Well they did say 'we have no plans to move the channel onto the sports package' when asked last season so I think its only a matter of time before they do this. I know they are also offering less when people threaten to leave as they've cottoned on to the tactic now, so its doubtful you'd be able to blag the channel at no extra cost should it move completely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
This was always the worry with Sky getting F1.
They tried (and failed) to make us believe they wouldn't do this and wow after one year they have. Next season you will have ads in race and the year after have to pay extra on top of your sports package.
welcome to how speedtv/speedvision showed F1 over the past decade here in the USQuote:
Originally Posted by steveaki13
I loved the crew but the coverage style with its 5 minute in-race ads, premium package service in many areas, only Fp2, qualy and race
then abbreviated fox coverage with some others in the past few years, that is what we had to deal with and why i moved to online viewing
Now I don't even know where its going to be shown in 2013
At least you get what you pay for with a dedicated channel for F1
F1 is going to NBC for US coverage in 2013, so overall it should be easier for the average person to watch the racing here. From my understanding some races will be on the "main" NBC channels with others being on the NBC Sports Network channel. Hopefully most people will have both in their cable/FIOS/dish network package.Quote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
From what I've heard we will get some practice coverage, but I'm not sure if that will be all sessions or not. All races to be aired live the last I heard, and available for live streaming on the NBC Sports Network site IIRC. The entire team from Speed less Sam Posey will be with NBC.
I hated the Fox coverage, hopefully this new package will be as good or better than Speed.
And I'm so glad my Mrs opted for an HD Sky+ box !Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
But I have looked at my finances wondering if the £35 per month would be more sensibly spent elsewhere.
We did have a decade or so of the coverage being on ITV so we had adverts every 15 to 20 minutes throughout the race then. Obviously this was fazed out with the BBC and thankfully now we don't have to put up with adverts during the build up and post race either. How long before Sky sneak an advert in during the race? They don't tend to do it with football but F1 doesn't have a break after 45 minutes either. I think in the coming years when they feel they can get away with it, they will. At the start a lot of effort was put into tempting viewers across and this clearly hasn't worked as well as they'd hoped. Now they can relax and merge the channel in with other sports and advertising comes hand in hand with that.
I think being picky since the passing of James Hunt F1 coverage in the UK has always had issues, except for one season 2011.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
After Hunt, Palmer was wel informed but truely dull.
Then the ITV days were bad. Jardine, Blundell, Rosenthal, ads, goodman. I personally didnt mind James Allen & Brundle mostly but once Lewis appear he became slightly obsessed.
Then BBC was a revelation, but I still didnt like Legard.
Then 2011 was perfect for me. Brundle did Ok as a lead commentator, he and DC were informed and chilled out. Then they had to go and ruin it. Decent line up in the comm box and good pundits, no adds and every race.
Now although I have Sky F1 and dont mind their work, its still not as good as that one near perfect season. Although the season in terms of racing wasn't awesome with a one sided championship.
I always watched BBC for f1, when it came to sky taking the license i was annoyed angry sad etc, but the Sky broadcast has more options and clearer view available such as drive on board is more in depth, pit lane cameras, better build up than BBC, however sky do tend to put more breaks into their races
Well thats not hard. 1 in a 5 hour programme would be more. :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash Smalley
Have to say I agree totally. Which is why it was more upsetting about Sky because finally in all my time watching F1 the coverage was spot on then they go and throw it all away.
I guess we just can't have nice things :(