At the end of the year the Formula One Teams’ Association is intending to host a number of forums to discuss how to move the sport forwards to the benefit of all stakeholders.
F1′s success is driven by the international media. The TV viewing figures pull in the sponsors and advertisers but the sport is written about in newspapers and on websites across the world as well. Increasingly, those doing the writing are not at the races because they cannot afford to be. This means two things: the reporters who travel get less work, because the stay-at-homes can undercut their prices; and the overall quality of the reporting goes down because there are fewer reporters with personal contacts in the sport. Thus coverage of the sport becomes less authoritative and in consequence less respected. Teams have to do more media firefighting, stamping out incorrect stories which take on a life of their own when one copier after another spreads the word across the World Wide Web.
There are always going to be big publishers who will pay whatever it takes to send people to each race but it is also hard these days to find people willing to do all the races, because of the effect the calendar has on their personal lives. Being away from home more and more is not a good thing when one is dealing with families and children. NASCAR has long had the same problem but there journalists now share jobs in order to keep up. Having said that I read somewhere that there is now only one news organisation that sends a representative to each and every NASCAR race. The big European newspapers, under pressure from the Internet, are now baulking at paying all the intercontinental bills for F1 coverage.
These are clearly not things that were taken into account when the 2010 calendar was being planned. If you look at the start of the year in 2010 there will be four races in five weekends between the kick-off in Bahrain on March 13 and the return to Europe 35 days later. This means that F1 people will either have to spend the whole month on the road (with the commensurate spending) or they will do an out-and-back to Bahrain, followed by a double-header in Australia-Malaysia and then another out-and-back to China. Three expensive trips, with the inevitably wear-and-tear associated with the constantly changing time zones. The drivers will be fine. Obviously the wear-and-tear is less if one has an executive jet or one has to struggle along in First Class. They can do promotional work in Asia and sit on beaches. The end of the year is little better with a Singapore-Japan double-header, then a two-week break before Korea and then another two-week break before Abu Dhabi. Three expensive trips or another lengthy period staying in hotels away from home. Oh, and that is not to mention the in-and-out to Brazil in mid-November.
Obviously, F1′s only criterion for locating races is the money that a promoter will spend and these new races in Asia bring in vast income, although none of this is used to support the F1 media, who are robbed blind wherever they go with hotels gouging them and even the circuits charging up to $150 each for access to the Internet for a weekend.
Yes, you did read that right.
Add to this all the necessary flying and other costs and you can see that, while being a great life, F1 journalism is fast becoming prohibitively expensive. The core of F1 freelances – the people who have the experience – are up to their necks in the costs and many are starting to stay at home. Last year in Japan there was a tiny international press corps and it will be intereesting to see how things are this year.
Logically, the place to live now is probably Dubai, which has the benefit of being tax-free and closer to all the races, which means lower flying costs and less human damage. But how many people want to move their families to the Middle East unless there is a big company behind them, paying the bills, and huge remuneration. Thinning out the media in F1 is probably something that the circus may think is desirable, but in the longer term it cannot be a good idea in what is a media-driven sport.
Given the current trend of restaurants asking customers to decide what they want to pay rather than set prices, in an effort to create more business, one wonders whether the time has come to ask readers for donations for the year ahead…
That may be the only way that we freelances will be able to keep going… as switching websites and blogs to subscription models does not appear to work.
You are kidding me $150 a weekend to use the internet, things like that are absolutely ludicrous!
I’ll donate to read your prose. Set up a link!
I’ll see if I get any more interest!!
expensive business this F1 lark! the other effect is also on publications. I no longer buy any regular F1 magazine, due to:
a) the proliferation of information on the web (dodgy or otherwise)
and (more pertinently)
b) the lack of quality in the publications.
One can often tell when someone is merely reporting on what we have all seen on the TV over the weekend or was actually there at the track. Even many reporters that attend races no longer go onto the circuit.
I grew up reading Nigel Roebucks reports for autosport, full of wry observations, wit and insider information and most importantly a true passion for the sport which he managed to convey on the page. I would egerly await Thursday morning for his Grand Prix report (in autosport) his often breathtaking discriptions of Senna on a pole lap (often from a trackside view point) is something which is sadly lacking in todays reporting. It doesnt matter how many ex drivers you get to do a lap by lap analysis, or strategic breakdown it leaves me cold, I saw all that on the telly and Brundle or Davison described it aptly at the time.
I think there are a hardcore of old school journalists who still travel to GPs (like yourself) and can actually also write well too and then there are ‘the others’. I think its the Jenks school of reporting! (of which, stylistically, you and Mr Roebuck are very much members.)
Sadly many contemporary reporters don’t really write so much as ‘report’ and its dull, lacks passion and feel.
As is often the case in todays world, quality gets pushed aside for expediencey and a short term financial perspective. (fools gold)
Would I pay to read your blog? Perhaps, if ‘the price where right’. However having said that, I’m old enough and wise enough to know that whatever appears (or doesn’t) on the internet or in the printed press ultimately means little to me, the only thing that truely matters is 1pm Sunday afternoon 18 (or 19?) times per year. Everything that needs to be said gets said right there and then.
I enjoy reading your articles and would gladly donate and/or help where possible!
Joe, I am a recently arrived reader of your blog, having been pointed at it by an ex BTCC chap. I have to say it’s by far the most interesting well written stuff I’ve seen in a long time. Get a paypal donate button up on your site asap and watch a few bob come in – I’d gladly pay some cash and I’m sure many others would too.
I second iain’s sentiments. I’m happy to donate, to help both the blog and grandprix.com. There is a whole world of F1 coverage out there, but Joe is one of the few people who I trust and enjoy.
I suppose it is a side we as news readers don’t usually think about much. I know I am guilty of just assuming that the media companies pay expences and thats how it works. Sadly, whilst I think many would be willing to pay for access to quality sites like this one, I am not sure there would be enough to cover even one journalists travel expences for an F1 season. I am one of those that rarely, if ever, buys the printed media anymore, I prefer being able to pick and chose my reading from the huge resource that is the internet and indeed, happily pay an online subscription for the extra bits of Autosport not available to everyone. The same would go for this blog, and several other sites I enjoy, but I feel I am in the minority on this. Having said that, giving people the option to subscribe or donate, rather saying you ‘have to’ is perhaps a viable option, perhaps with a few perks for those that do – an occasional live chat or some such. It is human nature that they respond better to reward for good than punishment for bad.
Meanwhile, if the international press corps at GP’s is reducing year on year, one has to wonder how long it will take before someone does something about it. One wonders whether their is a will to do something about it at all, or whether there is an agenda in pricing the smaller/internet/freelance journalists out of the market, thus offering more exclusivity for the major TV companies that pay a lot of money for the rights to F1, even the most inept ones.
I pay for GP+ and would donate at times for the blog updates. Frankly, for me each morning starts with linking to Joe’s blog and James Allen’s blog, because these are today the places that the anaylsis (as against litany of quotes from drivers and PR people) can be found.
Set up a donate through paypal or equivalent option Joe, it won’t hurt, and if some folks will do it. One of the technology podcasts that I follow has such a setup, and one can do one-time donations or any amount ($2, $10, $etc) a month as options. I’m told the normal situation is that around 1% of people donate something, so you can work out from your unique visits stats what your potential is.
Keep up the good work
if you update the blog as frequently as you have done in recent days, I’d happily donate as well
Joe, don’t you think that agencies such as GMM have led to the decline in true reporting. All we see on numerous sites is generic articles, all obviously from a single source.
The in-depth articles of days gone by are a dying breed.
As for donations, it’s certainly worth a try, but many people won’t pay if they can get it for free. It may just be a case of every little helps.
I presume you have also investigated sponsors/advertising.
What you are encountering, Joe, is the inevitable fall towards free in the price of goods with an infinite availability. News and information are an ‘infinite good’ because I can copy them any number of times without reducing the supply – the consequence is that the unit price tends towards zero.
This is the same problem that the music and movie industries are struggling with. Their ‘solution’ is to make their goods less functionally useful with DRM – a strategy that is doomed to failure as no DRM has ever proved unbreakable. This is called attempting to create an artificial scarcity.
The major newspaper organisations are talking about putting their content behind paywalls (pay-to-access), and as soon as they do that, they are going to have to really improve the quality of their offering before they’ll make enough to even compare to the advertising-based revenue they get now by making their news free at the point of delivery. The reason? Because there will always be someone willing to publish news for free, circumventing the paywall. And no ‘intellectual property theft’ (what a terribly inaccurate term that is!) need take place to do that either.
So, to come to my point, what I suggest you need is a business model that encourages people to buy something whose availability you can control. Some economics writers (e.g. Mike Masnick at techdirt.com, amongst others) describe this as ‘Cwf + RtB’ (“Connect with Fans” and “Reason to Buy”). Your blog is an excellent example of ‘CwF’ – we’re able to conduct effective discussions with you, and other interested (& interesting) people. In addition, there appear to already be people who accept there is something desirable here for which there is a reason to buy … your insight into F1, and I would be one of these people too.
However, I suggest thinking further into the future might be wise. Something you currently have is excellent contacts in F1. Could that be parlayed into guest-posts (with a expectation that the poster stay around to take part in moderated conversation like you do – I’d like to see one with Pat Symonds, for example)? Or off-season events in the real-world, such as Joe-hosted face-to-face events with some of the unsung guys behind the success of the drivers?
My point is that you need to look to finding the real scarcities in your business, rather than trying to lock and hide what we have come to love here: your excellent articles and the discussion that goes with them.
Totally understand your point Joe. There’s so much crap reporting out there! I find the only sites I think that are worth looking at are yours (and GP.com), James Allen’s, and the pieces on BBC written by Mark Hughes. Would happily donate to keep you going.
Joe, I was about to write about how much I value your blog and would willingly donate. The I read down the comments and saw my other half had already posted!
Since she is much more generous at spending our money [more practice] it’s better if we let her arrange the redistribution of wealth but please keep up your good work.
Interesting. I’m looking to get into motor racing journalism in the future, and increasing costs isn’t exactly the best message to send out to anyone who might be considering a career like this
I agree with Yvonne in that I don’t think it should be compulsory to pay to get access to everything, but you could do something similar to what Autosport have done – keep the news free, but charge the reader for the additional extras such as the GP Encyclopedia, the features and perhaps the archives, which in particular I would pay for because GP.com is one of the few websites that has a news archive going back as far as it does – I’ve spent many hours sifting through there
Excellent, interesting post, Joe. The costs associated with covering F1 for freelancers is something Ive wondered about often, possibly due to having freelanced myself (in a completely different field) for many years. Ive linked to your blog from my own and mentioned it several times, because Ive felt that if somebody has any interest in F1 and they are looking at my blog, then yours would be a goldmine of discovery. An optional Paypal button or similar would be a great idea, because in my opinion the true treasures of the internet should be available free to all, but give those who are happy to show their appreciation financially the option to do so.
It’s all been said above, Joe, please put a Paypal button up. I have to believe that top quality work like yours floats to the top, ultimately, and I’ll gladly do what I can to help.
If the teams (i.e., FOTA, if it still exists in fact) had any sense they would seriously consider setting up and funding a good-sized “pool” of journalists whose constitution is either rotated or voted on periodically based on quality of coverage, plus a substantial but reasonable membership fee.
Who votes? The consumers, via the web, which would perhaps not be a very scientific approach and subject to ballot-stuffing without some controls, but statistically speaking it could be fair enough. It would likely attract only the more interested, hence informed readers. And it might even promote some even more serious reporting.
What controls? The simple way is to “buy” a single vote using a credit card, a PayPal account, or even (as far-fetched as it may sound) an iTunes account. For $0.99 I think I could handle it, and all these payment vehicles can be used to limit voting by a single account holder. That money would help offset the administrative costs, at the very least.
It’s the teams and their sponsors who benefit financially from greater coverage, and a few million a year (bucks, pounds, euros — take your pick) would be cheap advertising for them all. And such things as travel expenses for the pool could be better negotiated as a block, although that would benefit the administration of the pool rather than its members.
F1 Ink is an alternative, but not really. It’s in the teams’ common interest to allow a level playing field where people can report and say what they like. It’s not in Bernie’s interests to allow anyone any leash at all, not on his dime. And he could care less what the ultimate source of his money is.
To be honest, I never imagined for a moment that a freelance F1 journalist could actually break even.
I am impressed if that is still the case currently. But let’s be honest, the writing’s on the wall.
In the future people reporting on races will either be salaried journos or wealthy enthusiasts. This is a sad reality.
I like many others here would gladly contribute for your excellent and passionate writings.
Ben nailed it in terms of the economic reality of media content (writing, music or whatever).
Watching the teenagers of today gives some insight into how perspectives are changing. Many absolutely expect to be able to get this sort of stuff for free. IF someone knows about the excellence of your blog, then they may be persuaded to pay for it. But if you go the route of making it mandatory to pay, what will happen after the current crop of us fans have all signed up? How will you entice the future customers?
I found this blog from a link in a discussion forum where the poster was referring to a post you had made. I followed the link and thought “Hey, that was kind of interesting…”. Some days later I had cause to want to refer back to that, searched out your blog and that time I bookmarked it. Then, gradually I started visiting here regularly and eventually became a regular and check this out every day. Point is, there is no way I would have paid for this priviledge prior to having gone through this somewhat lengthly “indoctrination”. I feel the site has to have free access to allow it to continue to grow the readership.
What you really need to consider (in addition to a “donation” option) is the value you can sell of the large readership. Typically, this means advertising. Advertisers DO value that you have zillions of F1 fans reading… Your site is beautifully ad-free at the present, and I know there is a great pride in that purity, but you have to make a living…
P.S. Just saw the donate button and happily left a modest contribution in support of your efforts!
ditto Allan.
However, wou might like to check where the paypal auto-redirect goes. The grandprixplus.com/response.html is 404′d.
I remember working at the college paper back in the day covering the Pac 10 conference as a photographer. If you got a press pass, it was golden. Free internet access, free seats, free food, free drinks, and media guides. Every public relations director knew that the press was essential in how their school was viewed by the pubic.
You have to love F1 short-term thinking. $150 for internet? How does that create good will with the people who will decide how your event is viewed?
In terms of press coverage, the one thing that the newspapers in the US didn’t realize when the internet came along is that people didn’t buy newspapers to get the news right away, they paid for the quality of the reporting. It has proven true that publishers and people (like yourself) who continue to write quality stuff are the ones who in the end of the day will have an audience.
So yes, I think I would be will to pay a bit more for GP+ for the quality I get.
Hi Joe! I truly appreciate your opinions here on the blog as well as GP+. I will help contribute to keep you close enough to the people of F1 that you can tell us …. you can tell us like it really is! Perhaps you could have a level of contribution that would include GP+ too as an incentive to make a larger donation.
Ooh – and maybe for contributing members have additional content like addition photo’s from the race weekend! The images in GP+ are great and I’m sure there are even more that do not get shared with us.
GFehr. Your journalist fund is a splendid idea. Once upon a time a great enthusiast called Steve Sydenham created a similar scheme called ‘Racing for Britain’. Fans paid £1 to vote for their favourite young driver and the most popular scooped the pot as their RfB sponsorship.
A couple of years in, Julian Bailey had the brilliant idea of sending in a thousand postal orders in the names of people he took from the phone book, each voting for himself!
The trouble is that I suspect that Joe is not the only journalist who will remember that!
What Iain said. And what Ben said, too.
I work in the web/print magazine business (though not motorsport press). It’s a tough place to make a buck these days. The idea of quality reporting and writing and serving an audience are out of favor.
First the travel budget got cut, then the copyeditors were laid off, then production got outsourced to India (!), then they licensed the whole operation out to a contract web shop.
Quick turnaround, community sourced, repurposed newsfeeds, minimal editing… page views, unique visitors, time on site, click throughs… these are the buzzwords. This is what I’m being asked to do.
It hurts, frankly, and I feel your pain. The web turned publishing on its head and from what I’ve seen most shops not yet worked out how the new business operates.
The new model makes it tough to earn enough to support a family, but it is possible. You’ve got audience, Joe, you just need to leverage it right and be realistic about the short-term return on investment.
Remember, there have been many previous revolutions in modern broadcast media: radio (the big one), TV, cable, and desktop publishing. They all upset the status quo to some extent. But they all opened new horizons to those who got their heads out of the sand and embraced the change.
I’m happy to provide some (free) advice, Joe, if you want it. Use the e-mail address associated with this post to reach me.
I’ve donated Joe,
As a reader of GP+ and your blog I will gladly donate regularly. Keep up the great work and there are a lot of very good suggestions in the comments.
Looking forward to this weekend.
great idea joe, donation’s on the way- will continue to do so whenever i can!
look forward to your take on this weekend
The internet connection price in particular sounds like it’s begging for an entrepreneur to figure out how to circumvent the system and develop some sort of group internet connection system that doesn’t require the circuit’s (or the FIA’s or FOM’s) approval. $150 per journalist and several dozen journalists per event, all needing the internet to do their job means there’s a lot of money to be saved (and gained) in the system even if the powers-that-be are too foolish to understand the damage they’re doing to the system. Quality journalists attract new people into F1 and cause those attracted to develop deeper affections towards their sport. People pay for what they love, as I suspect your newly-minted “donate” button is proving.
At that rate, I could be connected to the internet via my phone on international roaming rate and sent/received 18 MB of data*! To put this into perspective, I can log into my blog, post an entry and come out again about 150 times for that much data usage. As a short-term measure, using a phone (and perhaps a Bluetooth/infra-red dongle) could be a good way round this small but striking extortion.
There are several providers about, so I would imagine that if the Great O2 Failure of Hungary** is repeated, that the collective spirit of journalists sharing a common enemy~ would ensure someone with a provider giving service would allow his/her fellows to upload their works using their device.
* – I’m on a pay-as-you-go device from Virgin, but I expect other mobile phone providers to charge reasonably similar amounts for PAYG and possibly less if you’ve got a contract.
** – According to Five Live, the O2 network went down in the vicinity of the Hungaroring for at least part of the weekend, which caused problems for them receiving questions from viewers via Twitter.
~ – In this case deadines, bad service and aforementioned money-grabbers, in no particular order.
[...] an objection to the length of the calendar and the increased number of events outside Europe is Grandprix.com’s Joe Saward: F1 journalism is fast becoming prohibitively expensive. The core of F1 freelances – the people [...]