I'd be careful about assuming that an owner making more money from a product translates to a higher quality product. If costs are cut harder/faster than one loses revenue, more profit could be garnered from lower revenue. But like Tony George (IRL), Andy Evans (IMSA) and Kevin Kalkhoven (CCWS), I'm leery of a guy, who I don't think knows much about racing, coming in as owner of the biggest racing series in the world.

Other than Fox Business News and Speed Channel, I can't say that I know all that much about Murdoch's other media assets. But I have read that Speed Channel now turns a profit, whereas Speedvision did not. But IMO, the new Speed Channel is a much lower quality channel than Speedvision was - other than F1, GP2 and an occasional Grand Am race, I no longer watch it. And Fox Business News (compared to the gold standard: Bloomberg News) is a rolling joke... but I bet it makes a tidy profit. Murdoch has something of a reputation here for going for the sizzle & flash over substance. He's not really a "substance kinda guy", or so it seems. Maybe others have a different impression of him though.

Maybe Ruppie would be OK for F1. But he strikes me as the sort of guy who would stick the likes of Danica Patrick in a car just to generate higher ratings and ad revenue. But... ol' Bernie isn't going to live forever. And I guess I'd rather see the Faux News guy running the show rather than Tamara & Petra.