The testing in Jerez is probably not worth reading too much into. The teams were all up to different things and the results were rather varied depending on the day. This was followed by a lot of stories with quotes about how one team felt it was going to be more competitive than last year and blah, blah, blah… No-one said that their car was rubbish. No surprise there then.
It seems that some progress has been made in negotiations for the new Concorde Agreement, as the sport is still operating without one at the moment. Ten teams have financial deals with Bernie Ecclestone and it looks like Marussia is going to get some money as well, which is only right.In previous years the teams outside the top 10 got $10 million a year, which is a lot less than the top 10 but nonetheless a decent wedge. I tend to agree with Bernie Ecclestone that teams should prove that they deserve the money they get. The deal is likely to be pretty similar to previous years with some travel costs and (perhaps) some assistance with engine bills.
Elsewhere there was some chit-chat after the announcement of the Le Mans 24 Hours entry list about a Chinese team called KC Motorgroup Ltd, which has been granted an entry for the French endurance classic. What was interesting is that the team founder Paul Ip is quite open about his plans.
“I started KC Motorgroup Ltd with one ambitious goal in mind, ” he said, “to be the first Formula 1 team in China. This year, we are going to compete in the Le Mans 24 Hours – which is an amazing opportunity for us. In the foreseeable future, KCMG will expand further to the European countries and through-out the world.”
So it is worth keeping an eye on him.
Jaime Alguersuari did himself no favours with a little outburst about how it is unfair that his F1 career has run into trouble, despite the fact that he is only 22. Given that he had two and a half years in F1 to show his talents one might say he probably had a fair chance with Scuderia Toro Rosso, although he thinks Red Bull’s decision to drop him was “incomprehensible”. To suggest that F1 is an auction is also not really the right thing to be doing. The top drivers get their drives and are paid because they have proved themselves worthy of that. The rest have to scramble as best they can. It was ever thus. Alguersuari is also unhappy that a team let him down with promises about 2013 that were not kept. It may sound harsh, but Samuel Goldwyn was right when he said that “a verbal agreement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on” and it is just a tad naive to think otherwise. Far worthier men than Alguersuari are also out of work in F1 this year, notably Kamui Kobayashi, who looks like he is heading to a Ferrari drive in GT racing.
I notice that a few websites are now finally beginning to pick up on the mess into which Force India boss Vijay Mallya has got himself with Kingfisher Airlines, as the banks have now announced that they are moving to recover $1.4 billion of defaulted loans to Mallya’s Kingfisher Airlines, which has been grounded for several months. The team bravely says that this will not affect the season ahead and I am pleased to hear that, but I am still rather sceptical as to whether a team with two troubled deeply owners and little real sponsorship can go on spending to the level that Force India does. I am also curious as to why it is taking so long for the team to name a second driver. It is not logical if the only criterion for the choice is talent. It is far better to allow whoever is chosen to settle in before the season begins. Thus, the cynic in me suggests that the choice is all about money.
The other point of interest is the latest TV viewing figures which reveal that the overall audience in 2012 dropped from 515 million to just over 500 million. That is still a terrific audience. If you have ever wondered how such numbers are calculated it is worth noting that the figures involved come from the broadcasters themselves. These come originally from market research companies such as Nielsen who use statistical sampling techniques that are not dissimilar to the methods used by political pollsters. This is achieved with a sample audience including different classes and income brackets. The figures from the sample are then extrapolated to estimate the number of viewers in the population of a country. It is a very complicated business but seems to be pretty accurate.
The biggest audience drop for F1 in 2012 was in China, where viewer numbers fell from 74.5 million in 2011 to 48.9 million, a whopping 35 percent. This was blamed on programming clashes. Audiences in Russia also fell by 12.9 percent which was probably due to the fact that Vitaly Petrov was not doing particularly well. Brazil, on the other hand, was booming and most of the European markets did OK, although the numbers were slightly down in the UK, where the advent of pay-TV had an impact. This was offset by the fact that Sky produced vast amounts of coverage which was watched by those who invested in subscriptions.
Nonetheless the sport claimed 21,000 hours of coverage in 185 countries, with 110 broadcasting organisations. It is worth noting that Italy and France are both switching over to pay-per-view/free-to-air mixes in 2013. In Italy Sky is taking over the rights but is sub-contracting some of the live coverage to free-to-air channels; while in France it looks like the whole championship will be shown on the pay-TV Canal Plus. These trends are caused by the fact that free-to-air channels do not have the money to compete in the bidding with pay-per-view companies. At the moment this does not seem to be a worry for F1 sponsors, but the teams are keeping a close eye on the numbers in case that starts to impact on their rate cards.
“This was followed by a lot of stories with quotes about how one team felt it was going to be more competitive than last year and blah, blah, blah… No-one said that their car was rubbish.”
u r referring to the Lotus F1 Team right?
No, to several…
The excuses will start in Melbourne.
Welcome back Joe.
joe whats your opinion on giorgio ascanelli moving to brembo??
http://www.f1minute.com/news/former-toro-rosso-chief-giorgio-ascanelli-joins-brembo
I don’t really have one. Giorgio is a fine fellow, a great intellect and a decent singer.
So I’m guessing that works out to about 25 million people watching per race ? as 500 million per race seems a bit off.
With one-fifth of the viewership in the UK alone. Ouch.
I understand that the viewing figures are based on consumers watching 15 minutes per viewer per race, which only translates to 62,000 full race views. 62,000 can’t be anywhere near the number of viewers that watch entire European or American football games. It was interesting that US viewing figures dropped even with the race in Austin
There was more than 62000 at Silverstone watching the race live! I think you have miss understood the figures.
I know what I read, I actually read it 2 or 3 times. I posted the statement hoping Joe might be able to shed some light on the gathering method used because what I read didn’t sound nearly as impressive as 500 million viewers that watch the whole race.
Assuming the 15 minute claim is correct (see karen’s comments below – which unlike Prescott I’m inclined to believe) I’d expect it to be more of the order of the number of viewers watching “at least 15 minutes”, rather than it being a viewing figure in person-quarter-hours.
@Jem Karen says that a viewer is defined as someone who has watched 75% or more of the race. This is NOT the methodology that FOM uses…
@Prescott: Long story short : I trust Joe’s judgement of people and Joe appears to trust karen far more than Christian Sylt (the only source I could easily find of the “15 minutes” claim).
karen stated that the 15 minutes method was the calculation of “reach” not of “viewers”. Clearly either karen or Sylt are mistaken, I’m inclined to believe that it’s the latter – and that various other outlets have just copied Sylt’s write-up of the method. Given that the report isn’t in the public domain very few journalists will have access to a copy – even fewer may understand all the terminology correctly as I suspect it’s fiddly stuff.
But an interesting question to reflect on over a cup of tea might be “how much would the two figures differ anyway?”
@Jem Joe can easily clear this up as I am sure he has got access to a copy of the TV report and can confirm whether it says that each viewer has watched 75% of the race or 15 minutes. I have seen this latter measurement written much more widely than a few articles. I also see that karen has not yet responded on this point.
I do not have a copy of the report. If Karen says it is 75 percent of the race, then I am sure it is 75 percent of the race. I have total faith in her. I have little faith in the other source.
Can you get hold of a copy of the report and clear this up? Surely Sylt would be the most likely person to get correct information from Ecclestone’s report? The two seem to be very close from what you have been saying
Karen is right.
What is Karen right about and what is wrong? It would be really helpful to know this clearly because I see no contradiction.
One does not “invest” in a subscription. One pays for it. One does, perhaps, but I will not. I live in France like you and as you know, TF1 has finally given up its half-hearted coverage of Formula One. So this year I shall watch 10 of the races on BBC and the remainder on RTL, though I do not intend to “invest” in German lessons. Life is too short.
Hey Joe has anyone spoken about the changes in the US broadcasting?
F1 has switched from Speed, because fox went after Nascar and couldn’t afford F1 so is changing its Speed channel from a motorsport channel into a general sports channel.
Now NBC has the rights, but will be posting it on their own sports channel. This isn’t changing much, but it will be interesting to see how NBC leverages the sport on the main channel. I went to the NBC sports site last week and they still didn’t have a dedicated F1 button at the top you had to go to “other” then “motor”.
If the sport wants to do well in America, NBC needs to be shown the pluses and get full access to people who know the sport, like yourself, for it to connect with the people.
Any sense about their movements for the new season?
I don’t know whether Jules Bianchi has any sponsorship money to bring to the fragile FI team but he certainly seemed to get the car moving at a decent pace during the first practice session days. But then we hear of Sutil coming back instead.
Hi Joe nice to have you back again.
You were presumably greeted by the news of the appearance of “Bernie’s magic paper” A document (a copy of a fax to Grib) which in the form it has been shown on the web actually seems to come from the Bank, from Gribkowski’s office in fact! Very strange then that it did not feature in the defence in Grib’s trial, since it would have helped him no end.
The numbers will probably drop further now that in France the races go to paying channel Canal+ rather than freeview TF1
It’s worth pointing out that the viewing figures come only from territories that have verifiable data gathering sources, and these amount to about a third of the countries that show F1, although they will typically be the countries with the largest audiences.
@Brent
That is the the calculation for ‘reach’.
A verifiable audience viewer (as used by FOM), is a viewer who has watched all (calculated at 75% or more) of the race.
Thank you. A useful piece of information.
And your qualifications to comment on this are what exactly? Your definition of the viewers is different to the one mentioned in the articles about the TV report so I presume that you don’t work for FOM as you claim…
She works for FOM.
As a cleaner maybe? She clearly doesn’t know anything about the viewing figures as she is claiming to because the methodology explained in her comment above is not the one FOM uses. The reports all say that viewers are those who watch 15 minutes of footage not 75% of the race.
That is what I read as well; 15 minutes per race.
Do you believe everything you read?
I’ve got the report from the last few years. They are actually difficult to understand unless you know how the figures are calculated. Karen does work for FOM.
Karen, how’s your boss Kate B? Still clinging on?
The BBC used to data collected by designated viewers via BARB I think. Diaries are kept. Do other countries use the same system and are they as reliable?
Is the figure of 500m ‘reach’ or ‘verifable’ (I assume the latter)…..?
“Measures the number of people who have watched 15 non consecutive minutes of the sport throughout the season” Christian Sylt, in The Gaurdian.
I would prefer to believe Karen.
Karen’s reply doesn’t make sense from my sources either – I hate to say this but it is typical of the ‘smoke and mirrors’ approach statistics by FOM. Her answer is bizarre – so only a third of the countries have a reliable source of viewing data? 500m is based on what then? As to the 75% figure, whose figures do they use? Unless BARB have changed their system 15mins is still the basis plus diaries etc. Don’t forget, this is still effectively an estimated audience anyway, it depends on who does the watching for BARB or whoever. The Christian Sylt method also sounds incorrect.
Did Bernie write the e-mail – it writes like the way he talks ie you’re left knowing just as little as you did before you asked the question!
PS What was @Brent inserted in the text?!
With respect, I think that Karen’s sources are better than your’s.
It still doesn’t make any sense Joe. I can’t say why my sources may be as good as Karen’s, for personal reasons (really), but if she’s going to make statements, and if she does work for FOM, then I only ask that they are clear and accurate with suitable back-up. I get tired of being fobbed-off – not by you, FOM in this case. Nothing she has said here is convincing so far. But that’s her problem.
Welcome back by the way.
I think some people haven’t read things accurately.
They’re getting confused with the calculation for ‘Verifiable Unique Viewers’, and ‘Viewers’.
There are:
Unique viewers (Varifiable, by electronic data gathering)
Viewers ( inc. Data book and Diary entry)
Viewings
and Views
Previously the calculation was done on views, and this resulted in Billions of viewers being reported (some may remember this). It’s now split 3 ways, and delivered appropriately.
Thank you for the info – I take back my ‘fobbed-off’ comment. Well done Karen – good PR!
Have you had a chance to read Gary Anderson’s analysis of his ‘adjusted’ testing times in Jerez ? Quite an interesting insight. The notable feature was the relative lack of speed of the RB. Hope he is right
Sometimes he is.
Finally someone who says it as it is with Alq, reminds me of a spoilt brat who chucks his toys.
The thing that really gets me sometimes is that people seem to think, that if you finally pull your finger out in the last few races of the year that this seems to make up for the last two years of mediocre performances.
Good afternoon Joe,
Just wondering if you had bumped into the Mole when you were in Cuba.
It seems to me that it would be the perfect location for a chat on the goings on within Motor Racing and Trade Development of the Secret Intelligence Serice!
A Chinese Formula One team is great news, bring it on!
As for the fall in TV viewing figures in China, this is understandable, because it’s incredibly boring. A bit like watching the BBC news from the 1970′s, complete with advert breaks. They would do well to follow the format of Sky or the BBC’s coverage.
Chinese people love eating in restaurants, how about establishing a themed Formula One restaurant. This will help promote the sport to a family audience, now there’s a thought…
Although the Dutch market is small, so being overlooked is understandanble, but we are also turning to a pay per view / subscription / a few free races model. I am a big enough fan to pay for it and also have the financial resources…but I wonder what it does for new fans that have to discover the sport…especially with a new Dutch driver this year…
Do we (you) know if VJ has been paid yet for the chunk of his Spirits company he sold to Diago?
I doubt it. There is still regulatory clearance going on as far as I Know.
Re: the Vijay and Roy sagas there’s been a lack of reporting right across the board. The boldness of selling penny stock at a promised 15% return ought to have been ridiculed across the front of every financial paper long ago. There are times when I feel editorial complacency borders on complicity, and that we’ve not learned to speak out, after the whole 2008 meltdown, is a indictment of human nature. Do these guy’s companies really buy so much advertising as to hold economic sway? I doubt that, but rather think that the problem is that it is so utterly blatant, that honest reporting might just sum up the whole affair (both, but they seem rather thick these two) with a word that pre-empts a judge’s decision.
No surprise that other websites have been slow to report the story. I got the impression one was more intent on personal invective slanted at Joe, not chronicling what looks to be a vipers nest of dodgy business that could deal a blow to at good team, and the eventual story inevitably tar F1 with scandal. (As if it needs any more) But then I am privately uncertain if some writers out there care more for F1 or their egos. Too busy “revealing” things . . .
To be fair, I might have given more benefit of the doubt, had I not been getting a very clear picture of VJM’s character. But that’s what men on the make do, they show only what they want to show, so if you don’t get to know them, don’t go to the races, or hide behind your laptop when you do, you may be taken in.
Despite I had some misgivings, I’m finally really looking forward to this season. It’s a crying shame there is so much scandal and mess behind the scenes. But if the collective F1 press, pro and amateur and wannabe, simply turns a blind eye, things won’t get better in the end. Oleaginous team bosses with very, erm, unusual backgrounds, and dolly birds on their arm, or gaudy taste in transport that is practically one in the eye to ordinary folk, are not a attractive image for family viewing. I’ve talked to too many people who have told me that they felt disgusted by one character another, over the years. It’s as if there were only one football club, in that F1 presents to non fans as a whole, and just as some could never support a soccer club because they hold strong opinions about say the manager, or the behaviour of a player, so it can be with F1, only sadly some reject the sport entirely as a result. I don’t much spend time in pubs any more, so my vox pop, anecdotal at best, is possibly out of date. But some just have very strong views (surprising how many will open a conversation with Shumacher – Hill arguments still) and having unsalubrious characters in the sport is often a reason I’m given for disinterest.
Sometimes I feel it’s like scandal at the Vatican, all hands scrambling to don their robes and say mass, to keep from noticing the problem. Only Benedict has shown that a Pope does have a choice, and his own mind. It’s a stretch of course to compare, but I think if anything a lot of people we may not know very much about, really want Bernie to stay, because if he’s sacrificed, that will distract at least casual observers, provide the cheap headlines for the sunday drivers of newsprint.
Fortunately, I know when I open the next issue of GP+, I can safely put it all out of my mind and simply enjoy the racing. If you’re just dropping by and reading this, without having read a copy, you should. It might dispel from your thoughts any impression – which I have noted some hold, some express here in comments, some exposit elsewhere – that Joe’s some kind of curmudgeon with a vendetta or grudge or axe to grind. People will make assumptions and conclude all manner of unkind and untrue impressions whenever anyone reports a negative. Grab a copy, and get some unadulterated racing reading.
Harping on again about this, Joe, but it would be really good if you offered single issues. The fact that may will miss races due to the Sky deal, and pay TV contracts new this season, is a opportunity to sell. I personally prefer reading a full report, to watching a replay. Mainly because if I miss the race, I’ve missed the whole build up, so like to get the whole picture.
Sounding like a advert for GP+ , but there just isn’t anything else out there equivalent, and I’m not ashamed in the slightest to support a good thing.
VJ and Roy sounds very familiar, didn’t they have a magic show? (Just resisted a quip about an disappeared tiger economy)
I’m quite happy to make a Tiger beer disappear, though doing it instantly is something of a waste…
As for not reporting VJM/Sahara’s various dodgy financial positions in the rest of the F1 media world, the only logical defence is that until recently it’s not had a very visible impact on their F1 operations. Even those prepared to give them both the benefit of the doubt (innocent until proven guilty and all that) can’t deny that the current paralysis over the second seat is an issue.
Glad you’re back! Your absense makes your value even more clear.
On the UK’s viewing figures which I understand may have been compiled by creatively counting the BBC’s live race weekend’s audience and those that also watched the later highlights.
Hands up those that watch both and therefore may have been counted twice?
It’s difficult to see why audiences wouldn’t fall when only 10 races are FTA and Sky can only muster an average audience of 600k.
UK TV figures suggest almost a 17% drop in 2012, one questions whether advertisers will continue to see F1 as cost effective as audiences continue to shrink and is F1 actually sustainable ?
To suggest that F1 is an auction is also not really the right thing to be doing.
It may not be polite to mention it but one doesn’t have to look very hard to spot just such an auction occurring across the roundabout from Silverstone.
Medion or Ferrari! No reserve!
re: paragraph 1…is there anyone who is clearly off the pace, the way Ferrari was from testing day one last year of the way McLaren was in years before?
I would think not given that the rules are essentially the same-just chasing and trying to close loopholes in the exhaust flow area.
Let’s see what happens from here to the first race.
Joe, great to see you back. I hope you and your’s had a great vacation/honeymoon.
During the break I finally had time to read Adam Parr’s interesting contribution to F1 history. I was pleasantly surprised to even see a reference to Joe and the Mole!
One of the key insights I drew from the book was the increasing collaboration between Christian Horner and Bernard. Given the closeness of the relationship between Max and Bernard was a key factor in the success of the sport and enrichment of Mr E, I wonder if Joe has any insight as to how this relationship might impact the sport going forward?
The book suggests that RBR received a one off fee for being the only double world champion team post 2008. This naturally mirrors the special relationship Ferrari had with Bernard in the past. Do you think this is a way of giving RBR a way around any future RRA and therefore winning their support?
Christian does what Bernie tells him to do.
hey Joe , welcome back , so maybe u shld be able to answer a big question for me : is first time a hard trip ?
The figures drop in Russia has nothing to do with Petrov’s misfortunes. They have never been particuliary high anyways, compared to say football.. or biathlon… or hockey… or whatever common kind of sports you pick. The core audience got used to cheer F1′s Big Heads and entering their state-funded compatriot rather irritated than pleased them. Others, well, of course numbers increased after Petrov’s debute, but after he was dropped from Renau’otus it was like, ah, forget about it. Need I say that after his marriage to Caterham, russian television has dumped full weekend translations and sometimes even live translations of races?
Mr. Saward:
This entry also appears on something called “Formula One Dream” at:
http://formulaonedream.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/210/
(apparently) without attribution. Can you provide more information about the presentation of your work at that location?
Thanks.
Someone stole it.
Sutil still has the backing of MEDION????
Interesting reading about Paul IP and his ambitions for F1 . Paul is an interesting Character he had a team in Asian F3 and then in Japan with PTRS .Ihad the pleasure to meet him and his Driver Matt Howson and he clearly had ambitions back then .when talking about Racing and Business he bought the Radical to China He clearly has the Contacts in Hong Kong and Mainland China one to watch as you say Joe
His team is still on the go, albeit under the KCMG moniker. He also has his squad running in the relatively new formula Pilota China Series too.
All this stuff TV audience figures and TV in general has made me reflect on where I personally stand. I read many posts from people who are adamant they won’t subscribe to Sky, at any cost. I can understand that, even though they may not be the same reasons as mine. One could easily follow this sport on free TV, not subscribing to a single journal/magazine and so forth, non-contributory in any sense. How this has come about is certainly the fault of the ‘people’ who run the sport, including but exclusively BE, who are seen by many fans to be bleeding the sport dry. Hence fans using any method they can, not to be fleeced by Sky, CVC or whoever. Instead of a better deals for fans FOM screw the most they can from them. This led to a great deal of mistrust – ‘us’ and ‘them’ if you like.
I don’t give a stuff what the viewing figures are really. I’ve been a fan for almost 50 years and just like to see the racing. Audience figures only important to FOM/CVC and the teams who earn their money from the sport. But I have never believed the figures attributed to F1. For me it starts with the race day figures at every GP, add a percentage for armchair enthusiasts (ie TV F1 fans) plus a little slack for the casual ‘drop in’ viewers who often watch because there’s nothing else on for example – the Canadian GP has picked up quite few that in the UK by hitting the evening slot. By my method the ‘official’ figures would probably halve – if FOM want to estimate the real ‘reach’ of the sport.
Who knows how the viewing figures are calculated? Are they saying x number of people watched one race in 2012 or is it an average of the totals from each race?
If it is the first then it may be misleading as many people would have missed quite a few races last year due to not having sky but will still be counted as before
I think I just explained how the viewing figures are done
Pitpass has today replied to this blog post aiming to clear the confusion caused by Karen. In that article it states:
Total Season Reach = 15 mins/race = 28.5m unique viewers
Total Season Audience = 15 non-consecutive mins through season = 500m unique viewers
Karen’s “75% per race viewer” is the hardcore enthusiast which FOM ignores.
In summary, anyone who has watched at least 15 minutes of F1 in a whole year counts as one of the 500 million viewers.
I don’t think that Karen caused any confusion.