Five weeks ago, en route to Austin, I was musing about what F1 could do to improve its appeal to the all-important US market. The sport has consistently marginalised itself from the US by being too expensive for the market it is trying to enter, and because it has lacked points of interest for US consumers. I cited two assets that F1 is currently wasting: Alexander Rossi, the only American driver within realistic range of F1, who came so close to being an F1 driver on a string of occasions, only to be kicked in the teeth on each occasion. Only a sadist would have enjoyed watching Alex’s misfortunes.
The second asset was the “Swiss Miss”, Simona de Silvestro, who had enormous potential for the sport, because not only is she a women who could competitively in F1, she is also a name in US racing circles.
And guess what? Five weeks later F1 has lost the pair of them, both now working as best they can to find drives in IndyCar, while F1 concentrates its efforts on strategically-unimportant spots such as Qatar and Azerbaijan (combined population being about half the number of people living in the New York metropolitan area – and most of them far poorer).
I don’t know about CVC Capital Partners (and I don’t care), but I am disappointed that once again my favourite sport has failed to deliver any long-term thinking. What is it that F1 stakeholders want? Is it access to the oil-rich hundreds in Baku and Doha? Or might it be wiser to go after 300 million consumers, who just spent a “disappointing” $50.9 billion shopping in the course of the Thanksgiving weekend? I don’t think you need to go to Eton and Oxford to figure that one out…
Grand Prix racing is basically bling for the oil-rich nations, making them feel that they are on the world map. The problem is that this bling is getting more expensive as the price of oil heads downward. Why? Because when the price of oil falls, the currencies of the oil-dependent tend to follow the trend. On Monday, for example, the Russian rouble took a four percent hit in its value against the dollar – in one day – and each percentage point it drops is likely to be a percentage point added to the cost of an F1 deal… The rouble is down nearly 40 percent against the dollar since January, which means that the cost of the race in Sochi is up the same percentage (assuming the negotiation was done in dollars). Izvestia reports today that the Russian space programme is grinding to a halt because they cannot afford to import parts for their space ships.
But you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see the problem…
Goldman Sachs recently issued a report predicting a continuing downward trend in oil prices because of rising production that is outstripping demand because of the state of the global economy.
Having said that, these oil-spurting outposts will still pay top dollar, even if they know that the US got two races for $1 each. Bling is bling.
But what would a properly developed F1 get from the US? It is an enthralling question. The States are reckoned to account for 70 percent of all sports merchandise sales in the world and its TV sports deals are bigger as well. As an idea, the current NASCAR TV deals are worth more per year, just in the US, than F1’s global earnings. The average race attendance at 33 events a year is close to100,000, and 40 percent of them are women. Half the kids in the US between the ages of seven and 17 say that they are NASCAR fans, while F1 seems to be deeply attached to the middle aged and to Rolex-wearing pensioners.
Now you can argue that there are different demographics for the two racing series, but that is not the point, what I am trying to highlight is the potential that exists for the sport in the US, something that all the sponsors know and want to tap into. Yet all F1 does is ignore serious projects that offer real potential and dream of hitting the jackpot in Las Vegas… A town where most people end up as losers.
I have tried to see logic in Formula One thinking for many years and the only conclusion I can reach (apart from a possible distaste for all things American) is that either they need more flexible thinkers involved, or they are leaving the potential untapped so that they have something to sell to the next lot of golden goose stranglers who will come along…
All I can say is that if it is an exit strategy, I fully support the use of it…
…as quickly as possible.
joeblogsf1 
It is said the super rich keep working because they enjoy the game of making money. Perhaps those in charge F1 are still addicted to the quick bug bucks rather than the longer term potential of massive sustainable sales. The brutal truth is one of them probably won’t be around to see the results in 20 years!
If F1 wants a major US presence then F1 should compete in the Indy 500. a sure win win for both IMS and F1
The Cloud Cuckooland 500
Do you think Colin Chapman and Jim Clark were cuckoo? They acknowledged they importance of racing outside of F1…maybe you should try that sometime.
Times change and it is always good to change with the times if that is possible.
Sir, there is one brave choice that you have already written about in this piece.
simply act and forget about ” if, and or but “…. believe Me when I write that the truth will set you free from this british circus act promoted by bullies in the 21st century.
be well and peAce out.
Joe is right on this one guys.
The Indy500 is a shell of a race and the series has withered.
Inducers have not been a big time racing series for sometime now .
The Lotus “invasion” of the 500 was mostly due to Ford looking to spend its newly-reborn motorsport budget. Likewise the GT40 project. F1 wasn’t on their radar until Walter Hayes sweet-talked them into funding the DFV.
Well, I realize that the Indy 500 isn’t what it once was… thank you for that Tony George, you #%*#@#…
But they should at least (a) ensure that Monaco and Indy are on different weekends and (b ) arrange for some *good* and *famous* F1 drivers to have top-tier rides at Indy… assuming that you want USians to know about them, that is.
How do you think Americans learned about Clark and Stewart?
what? F1 should compete? do you mean all the teams should by two dallaras and enter?
ROFL!
I love that idea! Indycar & F1 could operate to a fairly similar set of cost controlled rules, and race each other at Indy, while individual Indy drivers could race certain F1 events and the reverse. This would explode F1 onto the American audience, it would similarly boost Indycar if their teams had to build cars again, and the engine makers would win too! Absolutely brilliant. I’d love to see Vettel in his Ferrari, Alonso his Mac, Lewis in his Merc, against Teams like Ganassi/Penske & Rahal etc, fielding vaguely similar cars with their current drivers. It’s a great idea, why hasn’t anyone thought of this before…ah..yes, well it happened in the 60’s and 70’s didn’t it? So it must be c**p as it’s from the past…..
… & apparently there’s two reasons that the price of oil is falling:
1 low demand from China
2 USA became an oil rich producer
You’d have thought the second would have given F1’s owners even more motivation to go get an American race or three.
In younger years, Bernie used to be able to pull strings to place the right drivers in teams (or so it appeared).
That level of influence & control has gone – it’s not clear where to.
Maybe it just evaporated.
The sooner CVC find an exit strategy, the better.
The day I realised that Bernie’s influence was gone was the 2005 US GP. That was the day when he needed to do his job and earn his money, and he was no longer able to do so.
He’s achieved a few other things since then, but they are insignificant compared to that catastrophe in my view.
There’s a 3rd reason that helps explains the very sudden drop in consumer prices… one that our so-called news media won’t tell us about… it’s that the big Wall St banks now have to use their own money to speculate in oil… which means they abruptly quit bidding the price up among themselves.
I don’t know what it’s like in Europe, but over here it now costs ~$34 to fill up what used to be a $50 gas tank just a couple months ago… and some of that diff (not all, but some) is money that used to go from our pockets into Wall St’s pockets in return for them doing absolutely nothing but moving paper around. So, thank you, gov’t regulation of megacorps…
Hey RShack, I filled my Isuzu 4×4 yesterday, and the bill was £90, for about 16 UK galleons, last year it would have been around £108….we pay way,way,way more for fuel than you guys do!!
Don’t worry Joe, it can’t be all that long before the ugly little toad finally croaks…
It could very well be another 10, 15 or even 20 years before the ‘ugly little toad finally croaks’. He may even keep his marbles for a significant portion of that time, no matter what we may think of his calendar-setting skills.
Very erudite analysis Joe.
Nascar is a consumer-focused business, aware of its need to appeal to a mass audience in order to make it as attractive as possible to sponsors.
F1 is a short-term revenue-focused business. Thinking of the bigger picture, attracting many more viewers and making sponsorship a no-brainer for any company looking to get bang for their buck takes second place to coining in huge fees from tin-pot, bling-seeking dictatorships as the owners have no interest in sustainability and little regard for the welfare of team owners or fans.
In a few years, we could have races in Abu Dhabi, Qatar and Bahrain but no French Grand Prix, where it all began. A sport with no regard for the richness of its own heritage is an idiocracy.
Last year, F1 had a hit Hollywood film and made next to no capital from it. Anyone who perked up an interest in its wake did so coincidentally, with no input from Bernie, CVC or the teams. If they think $1.8 billion is a lot, for a sport with a global reach and F1’s history they need to think again. An average Premier League footballer on the subs bench earns more than most F1 drivers, and that’s insane.
F1 should be funding a whole series of documentaries, like ‘Senna.’ One per year should be enough to add a few million fans. There should be F1 novels, kids’ cartoons and comics. When I was growing up, most of the Scalextric cars for example were F1 cars. Now? Almost none are available, presumably due to marketing restrictions.
Yet still the sport reaches 4 or 500 million per race. Imagine what it could accomplish is those in charge had a bit of a strategy.
I assumed you were totally wrong about Scalextric, but I’ve just looked and incredibly you’re right!
That’s madness, there’s only a 2012 Lotus F1 car on their website, with 2012 Lotus and McLarens “Coming Soon”
I think you mean 2014 Lotus and McLarens “Coming Soon”
Maybe Scalextric isn’t as big as it used to be.
Oskar you make a good point in that NASCAR (and most series) consider themselves to have millions or at least many thousands of customers. F1 (therefore CVC) probably believe that they have 19 active and about 5 or 6 lapsed or prospective ones. It’s about as fundamental a difference in outlook as one can get and perfectly explains the myopia afflicting F1 when it comes to long term marketing strategy, i.e. the apparent lack of one.
Bang on. Great post Sir Joe. All of us who read you love F1 of course but now it seems we cling on more & more to the “good” old days of the 60’s to the early 90’s. Fortunately the sports heritage is so strong. Modern CVC/BE F1 feels just a tad seedy at the moment. Er and also, just by the way….the FIA is powerless!? Ha. You couldn’t make it up. And 800 staff teams. Sorry but that’s just ridiculous. Did you see the size of some of the floating gin palaces in the Yas Marina? (hoping you got an invite for a non-alcoholic aperatif) Yes, a billionaires/despots play thing and don’t even start me on the new CCCP GP. Unfortunately, the whole bloody thing still keeps me infuriatingly fascinated.
File under Politics/Finance/Sport/Global Branding/
IMO the problem is essentially that there is no alignments of interests between the owners of F1 and the teams, when it comes to long term strategy.
F1 is owned by private equity. And Bernie. Both parties are only interested in short term gain. They want to get paid now, or inside a couple of years. CVC are always looking for an exit strategy and Bernie does not care about long term thinking because he is already as rich as croesus and will soon be dead.
Once F1 is owned by people looking for a longer term investment return, the obvious strategy of tilting F1 toward the largest customer markets will prevail.
Until that happens, the owners of F1 are only concerned about extracting as much cash as they can from individual people in the short term. A long term marketing strategy is too hard and too delayed in its gratification, when all the owners have to do right now is smooth talk an oil state despot into handing over lots of cash.
Do you get any negative feedback from CVC, I mean directly? I know they, or BE, don’t dish out press passes but don’t feel exposed sometimes?
“Better to have him inside the tent pissing out, rather than outside the tent pissing in”
Love it!
Great stuff; I haven’t laughed as much in ages……
Bernie’s quote directly to you Joe, if I remember correctly from the Glassblower…
It’s going to change next season as FOM will control all media passes apparently…
Says who? Bernie Ecclestone? All articles delating to this can be traced back to a man called Christian Sylt. Who is he?
Someone who if he didn’t exist, would have to be invented. For comedy purposes only, mind.
He is the guy so far up Bernie’s………. That he can see daylight when Bernie talks, if I’m not mistaken.
I always think of him as an old style ventriloquists dummy!
That’s pretty apt….
LOL.
He’s a glorified stenographer.
I just read his article in Forbes via BBC F1 gossip and laughed out loud at his journalism. But I guess you’re not. I don’t know what his issue with you is! You’re a bigger man not a bite all the time.
The world needs to know about him. That is the only reason I do it. Otherwise he might be taken seriously.
If he is so close to Berni doesn’t that mean it is more likely that his report about the media passes is correct? And if not then why do you promote it? It will just drive up the hits
Bernie does not control media passes. He has tried many times to get them. If the FIA let’s go of them, the sport is screwed. If you want to believe what the muppet writes I don’t care, I an simply trying to ensure that fans have a proper picture of what is happening. You can lead a horse to water…
One thing you won’t want F1 to pick up from NASCAR is their level of control over the media messages that are reported.
If that were to happen all the media would report on would be the driver’s girlfriends and how much they spent at the mall while their men were racing.
I agree with your points but I fear the lack of penetration in the US market isn’t simply CVC / despot dictators buying races. Although it’s clearly a global sport at it’s roots it’s European and the audience is either European or European colonies. F1 wasn’t popular in the US before CVC / BE.
If you look at the biggest sports in the US few of them have a large presence or sometimes any presence on the international stage. Football (soccer) with perhaps golf are the only ones I can think of. Football has a grassroots following, people play from a young age and aspire to be professionals. NASCAR is very grassroots. F1 is not American nor is their any accessibility to the sport.
I’m not sure just dumping F1 in New Jersey will work any more than dumping Baseball in Leeds. What would be interesting though is changing one of the F1 feeder series to a US based series. Imagine that. GP3 becomes a US based feeder series for GP2 / F1. Of course it wouldn’t make F1 popular over night but coupled with a couple of races I’m sure you’d see more Americans enter the series along with their American teams / sponsors. This would flow through to GP2 and F1.
I did agree. F1 can be popular in the US.
Yes! Totally agree. There was a time when F1 was more popular in the U.S. than NASCAR. The U.S. GP was always well attended (how I miss Watkins Glen). F1 just mismanaged everything as Joe points out.
Our USGP here in Austin is well attended, look at the numbers, despite this being one of the worst world economies in my lifetime.
What’s going to popularize it?
Proper marketing makes almost anything saleable. If it turns out the product actually has value and is well produced and governed, the consumers are all the better for it.
As Joe has long said, fundamental changes must be made.
The problem Mark, is to know what changes to make… To my mind there is no trick marketing which would suddenly make it appealing to “everyone” and the US in particular.
I really like Matt’s idea about drawing “drivers” from the US into feeder series for F1. But is F1 that much of a draw to the aspiring racer in the US?
For me, the biggest “problem” with F1 is simply the absolute blandness of the drivers (perceived might I add…) and the total efficiency of the cars.
The cars and the technology are without any doubt the pinacle of any racing series. It’s mind blowing stuff and I can’t really see what you could do to make that part of it more interesting except that you don’t realize how difficult it is to extract the performance out of them.
But who wants to aspire to be like one of the drivers? It’s difficult to know who they are anyway, always hidden away, never driving against other drivers in other series, careful to say only correct things.
F1 as a product is about them and a bit about the cars.
BE and his controversial manner actually make the whole F1 thing human to me, I’ll hate it when he go’s because we’ll probably get a bland corporate type to match the rest of them. It’s all going to end up as a virtual game thing anyway 😉
Proper marketing utilizes feedback and supplies market demand.
Irresponsible spending and lack of (or ignoring) market demand makes anything saleable… with luck and chancing
F1 seems to struggle with lack of investment, lack of long-term strategy, overreacting to bumps in the road etc. This may be one of the very few times it may benefit from being run as a corporation.
This is terrible for the cut-throat nature of competitive F1 at team level, but overall if FOM was a supertanker with a long-term strategy and rational marketing plan etc etc, perhaps other important stakeholders would want to join in. Why would you get on a boat when you don’t know where it is going or if it will be afloat next week?
Had to double check you were talking about f1 – you could just as easily have been talking about most governments.
I don’t think it’s an exit strategy Joe, it is simply that Bernie & CVC are happy to accept the largesse of the Middle East and ignore Europe & America as much as possible. They like the Middle East for easy $’s and Bernie can’t find European governments like France or Holland, to pay him for putting races on. In America there is absolutely no chance of the US government paying him, so Bernie in turn isn’t interested in talking to any of them. Probably his next Big Idea will be a North Korean GP…..
As to the team principals, and owners, well they are all scared of Bernie, and to be frank, their forte in life is not Finance, so they probably don’t think things through much. Such as RD, for instance, are probably still in denial over the value of their product, which has. like everything else in the world, dropped in worth over the last 6 years since 2008. Unfortunately, F1 collectively, ( save for Force India/Lotus/Sauber ) still doesn’t get it that the world has undergone a huge change, and people and business, have to run smarter and cheaper with lower costs basis. Bernie & F1 need to take this onboard. Even the 3 smaller teams have only grasped this fact in the last year to 18 months, and then only when it smacked them in the face!
If left as it is, the series will continue to contract, this is just fact, it is plain and clear that as viewers drop out and spectators do to, as well as sponsors, the value in the series will fall as well. I don’t remember the exact figures, but I think I read that last year Sky was only drawing 500-700,000 viewers per race, while BBC was still attracting 2,000,000 per race even for the highlights. In 2 years I haven’t seen a single race on Sky, and not even seen F1 races being advertised at local pubs on Sky, whereas when the BBC had it, quite a few races would be on at my local pubs that have big screen TV, and the British GP was always shown.
Put bluntly, F1 is dropping off the radar with the UK public, and only Lewis Hamilton can help prop it up at present, and even he won’t be able to do much, for if he wins repeatedly next year, the good old UK press will start pulling him apart in the unpleasant way that they always do with British sporting personalities!
The sad thing is that there seems no way to alter how things are, until Bernie & CVC go, in whatever manner that happens. And then, things can only be made better, if there is someone at the FIA ( when they get it back ) who is actually interested in putting it back together again…..it sure is headed for Humpty Dumpty land at the moment, and for someone who as followed it since I was 7 in 1964, it really is heartbreaking. In 50 years, I’ve seen and watched, live, so much fabulous motorsport, not just F1, but what is happening now is a travesty of greed beyond all measure, and while I am fully aware that CVC are just in it to make a profit, they should never have been allowed near F1, and for that I blame Mosley, BCE and ALL the Teams.
Great insight Mr Cullinane, totally agree with all your points.
Agree; some good points here. I have followed ‘my sport’ since the early 1970’s and remember the tail end of JYS’s career and the great Hunt/Lauda years. For me, the golden era was 1984 to 1994, with 1986 to 1993 the absolute best. I remember the sheer feeling of ‘electricity’ being in the crowds at Brands & Silverstone those years – capacity crowds. I’m not sure of the figures (but I’m sure there will be those that will be) but, listening to the commentary in recent years, the Silverstone attendance still seems to be very healthy with huge race-day crowds? Doesn’t appear to by dying on its backside just yet, although I appreciate I’m just looking at one race. I accept however, that the ‘Lewis effect’ may have skewed things a bit and given a false impression perhaps? Back in the days of watching Hunt/Lauda, I also had an interest in football and I can’t help comparing the fortunes of both sports (F1/Football) in recent years. While it (football) was popular in terms of public appeal in the 1970’s, it’s nothing compared to the global popularity it appears to enjoy today. The eye-watering amounts of money don’t appear to have killed the game although there will be those that argue against this. Quite the contrary; the ‘greed’ factor, if anything, seems to have added to the appeal of football, with the financial side of the sport seemingly more attractive as a subject of conversation to most fans than the actual game itself?
Well I’m not a football fan, but to me the Premiership Teams look rather like Casinos for Oligarch’s to channel monies through, to clean the money up maybe? Afterall, who deliberately runs a business losing £ Millions every year….well, apart from F1 Teams, but then there are some dodgy sounding people in/out of F1 too.
+1
Very good summary damian
Great post Damian
Fantastic post.
Why would a big consumer brand want to invest $m’s in sponsoring F1 when it priotises Qatar and Abu Dhabi over the US, France, Italy and Germany?
Why would a big consumer brand want to invest $m’s for a team to spend on an improved front wing end plate that will improve performance by 0.2%?
Why would a big consumer brand want to invest $m’s in a sport where 18% of the teams went bust last year?
Why would a big consumer brand CEO want to be photographed in Sochi or Bahrain?
But you’re speaking as a modern, intellectual and balanced individual. Getting my very old mother to see what I think is complete and obvious sense is just, well, impossible. Her outlook on life is completely alien and unfathomable to me. That she doesn’t see any problems and is absolutely enjoying herself just causes me “cannot compute” issues.
Is F1 afraid of making a big commitment to the USA? Remember the USA loves to cast people as WINNERS and LOSERS – it could stand to lose quite a lot.
On another note – most other sports I’ve ever attended work hard to appeal to olders, youngers, females, families etc etc. Appeal to more folks, take more notes. F1 is terrible at this, truly terrible.
Lastly, on the Russian economy – what better way for the USA to cripple the Russian economy than by ignoring all shale gas climate concerns and over-supplying the global wholesale market?
Also, you forgot to mention the key factor about Simona de Silvestro that appeals to all audiences, especially the US…she’s exceptionally kind on the cameras.
Hi Joe,
It’s worse than you say it is. It the value of the rouble falls by 40% the cost of Sochi increases by 66%.
Original value: 1.00
40% decrease:0.60
Cost to sochi: original cost divided by new value of rouble.
1 / 0.60 -> 1.66 (166% of original cost)
I haven’t commented much on your site for ages. Some of your reporting is superb. I just wish there were like buttons on your site so that I could signify some support without having to fight the comment box (which always seems to fail on any tablet I use).
Like
Yank here. I heard Alexander Rossi sit in with the BBC 5 Live crew for a race, and let me tell you, that was an interesting race. That guy knew so much about what was happening in the cockpit and was able to talk about it clearly. I learned so much, all while the race came alive. In contrast, I’ve twice had the displeasure of watching the NBC coverage of F1 this year: somebody shoot me so I don’t have to listen to those ageing cheezes or watch those motorized dildoes pace along in formation as their ‘strategies’ play out.
See? I’ve solved F1’s problem in the US. Not going to say anything about the little problem of the $100 million dollar Supremo and his ‘associates.’ It’s not a little problem, though.
Another Yank, and a New Yorker here. Wish the race across the river would happen but alas, it ain’t gonna…
As I’ve said before, a big part of F1’s problem in the US is the piss-poor TV coverage.
And that’s because the powers that be at NBC (and Speed before them) have the same short-term thinking as Bernie and CVC – how do we make the most ad $$$ during a race with the least amount of effort so we show a big profit on a balance sheet.
I had the misfortune of watching one race this year on NBC (or was it NBC Sports, I don’t remember) and it was absolutely terrible. Down to the shrinking of the picture to show some stupid commercials DURING the race! Seriously?? If I were an advertiser I wouldn’t want my commercial shown on 3/4 screen while the race is on either. The commentators were truly terrible and had no clue what they were talking about. Rehashing the same talking points over and over again.
If more US consumers had the opportunity to watch a Sky broadcast or a BBC broadcast of a race they would be appalled at what passes as coverage on NBC. Because it’s truly pathetic.
If I weren’t able to follow the races on SkyF1 I would stop watching F1 here in the US.
I agree completely. They need to pipe BBC coverage in with maybe one American reporter walking around.
The parking lot at the first Laguna Seca F1 race would look like Top Gear Heaven. We have money, engineers and Teslas coming out of our ears around here.
F1 needs the right business plan.
Racing leagues needed for grass roots support. Xbox, indoor Karts, outdoor Karts, FF, GP3, F1 – all coordinated and paid for by F1. It’s sitting there waiting for the next Bernie to figure it out.
(Thanks Joe – you are an international treasure!)
Have to agree about the amount of advertising during the NBC and affiliates broadcasts. I don’t find the commentators that objectionable, but perhaps others do. I find ways of getting commentary during ads from other sources. Also, last i looked in the US one of the Spanish language channels also broadcasts the races, so I suppose one could switch channels during ads for the picture – and if your Spanish is good enough, maybe those commentators are better?
Agreed.
I watched the entire 2014 season on SKY in my office via a crappy low-res online stream on a 22-inch monitor rather than on stupefying NBCSports in full HD on my 200-inch flat-screen TV in the luxurious comfort of 1000-ct Egyptian cotton thread.
Will Buxton excluded. The other three are utterly frakking terrible!!!
Agree 100% on this. You can find my thoughts on many previous entries by Joe exploring why F1 just isn’t in the US. It is truly like nobody cares how dismal the coverage is so they can use it as an excuse to ignore the US market. In a sense, I can’t blame them for finding an easy excuse given how difficult it is in the US to get anything on the scale of a street race organized, paid for and, last but not least, insured. Everything else aside, can you imagine the army of legal experts it would take to get the permits together for a NYC race? Probably spend more on lawyers than any other single expense… This is not a defense of the current situation in any way, I despise the NBC coverage (Speed started heading downhill as soon as PW took a walk on his little project and never came back, and handed the very worst elements over to NBC…no offense to ‘the guys’, they do their best, but that’s amateur hour compared to SKY’s efforts).
Sadly, we’re in for at least another year of the same. Better fire up your bit torrent, and pay for that proxy streamer service so you can get a decent feed from that little island where all this awesome comes from. Our folks haven’t a clue how bad they really are in comparison.
At the risk of turning into an apologist for Hobbo and co, the big issue with NBC’s coverage is the fact that these guys sit in a studio in CT. Compare that to say the BBC, who don’t even have the TV rights to all the races. At every race they have at least JA, Jenny, Lee, Suzy, Eddy, DC, Alan McN – and others. Sky seems to have at least as many. With that investment, you can do a decent job, and the US team would benefit from being at a few more of the races.
On another angle, I’ve met one person in my family’s social group in the US that’s heard of F1. And one person at the last big company I worked for – whereas in the UK office of that company I’d guess a majority of my colleagues followed it at one level or another. In contrast, there’s no-one in Austin that doesn’t know about F1 at one level or another. We need more races here – preferably with a bit of controversy up front as there was in Austin, to keep the topic visible
“I have tried to see logic in Formula One thinking for many years and the only conclusion I can reach…”
is greed, laziness and hubris.
They expect USA to fall over to accept F1 and pay their ridiculous fees.
“The definition of madness is when you do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result”. America, meet F1.
HA! Have they missed the news bits about American greed? They should be on guard that we’ll be getting paid by them, if they’re not careful.
Seriously, though, our banks lost all that money and convinced the lot of us that it was a good idea to just…give them more.
We do pay those fees here in America and the people show up to prove the fact that F1 still works in America. I’ve been to all three, so far, races here in Austin. The stands are packed and the grounds are full of F1 fans from all over the world despite the economy.
what needs to happen here, and everywhere, is to get Bernie to allow the local promoters to hold on to more of their fees and to let them have the more of the signage and track sponsorship dollars. The promoters are happier, they lower our gate prices and then we become happier. This will in turn bring more sponsors into America and then more money for F1. Win Win
I can understand the sentiment here but…………
I’m afraid all this wringing of hands will do no good. F1 is The Bolt’s ball and if you don’t want to play by his rules you just can’t play.
He wants all the transporters in the paddock lined up to within a mm (sorry 40 thou) he wants a smoked salmon and cream cheese sandwich for lunch on a Saturday…………….
The last thing he wants is a load of spotty kids running around his immaculate paddock munching cheeseburgers.
Like I said, it’s his ball.
And something else……
If F1 changes so that Americans like it, it wont be F1.
I completely disagree with your last sentence.
if marketed correctly there is tremendous potential.
The idiots who created F1 lucked into a winning format.
It’s just that the potential American fans have no idea it exists…
What a strange view. It took years of conniving, back-stabbing and anti-social behaviour to build this great business. That is how empires are built. Did you ever wonder why the industrialists in the US in the 1890s were called “the robber barons”?
I have always thought that Monisha Kalterborn had to be a smarter thinker than some other team principals, but when she responded to a question about Bernie’s lack of presence on social media even she said “F1 sells exclusivity”
That comment made me think that the F1 pit-lane bubble is as completely out-of-touch with their public as the much-famed Westminster bubble.
NASCAR is hugely popular because it understands that it is all about the fans (consumers) the sizzle is much bigger than the actual sausage.
F1 could not be more opposite. Prostituting itself to Rolex wearing Sheiks and despots is just plain dumb. But then FOM are asset strippers, not investors.
Whenever I hear the “f1 is all about exclusivity” argument I am reminded of what one of the chaps from Radiohead said about the perils of fame. Some thing like “first you get allowed into the roped-off VIP bit in the club, then there’s another rope and a VVIP section…then another and another, and you end up all by yourself in a room.”
Pffffffffffffft.
What cynical provincialist tosh!! lol.
Another indication of potential in the US, the German GP this year had 55,000 spectators at the race, and this is with four German drivers on the grid. Austin had the double with no American teams or drivers.
Ha! I guess F1 in Germany is as popular as WEC in Brazil…..
May be CVC and BE think that they can not repeat or compete with the Beatles and break in to America. BE still thinks they are top of the pops doesn’t he?
@Azzurro_F is onto something about rationality
I have some professional dealings with Private Equity types. They tend to be very smart but some of them (not all by any means) have a very inflexible outlook – “This model works, therefore don’t change the model. I don’t care that there’s a better model or that the outside world may invalidate the model. The model works, don’t change it”
I’ve known many people who are very intelligent but lack any common sense whatsoever. That’s part of F1’s problem.
That’s the major part Mike; the teams are full of them
Just for reference, the new NASCAR television deal for 2015 with Fox and NBC (which also is F1’s US partner) is valued at £4,400 million for all three national series plus the regional developmental and often sportsman series.
Officials there sell paddock access is available in “hot” and “cold” forms (depending on before or during the action). When World Touring Car raced in Sonoma in 2012 and 2013, circuit officials sold paddock access passes.
As for NASCAR “grassroots,” the new television deal includes highlight coverage of grassroots races, and on NBCSN’s daily programme they have a segment where local motorsport is profiled. Most drivers, engineers, and even commentators come from a grassroots background that is glorified; Two grassroots drivers (Berry and Theriault) were awarded spot drives this year at the second-tier level by Dale Earnhardt Jnr’s team in the “all star” car; the primary two teams finished first and second for the 2014 season.
Television commentators in NASCAR (and ESPN’s INDYCAR) have a background where they are on a perch and do not have access to a television monitor to call the action trackside, and it is used on ovals and road courses. Their style is influenced by working public address and/or radio. Barney Hall (NASCAR) and Paul Page (INDYCAR) have influenced radio broadcast of motorsport in the US with their styles and sectional commentators is not lost when viewers arrive at the circuit. For INDYCAR, sectional commentators Kevin Lee and Jake Query are used for television broadcasts of lower-tier events.
As for family-friendliness, that does matter. Rarely in NASCAR (but also rare in INDYCAR, with a few sponsor exceptions) do half-dressed women appear in provocative outfits to glorify the race. It is common for drivers’ wives and children to appear in the paddock and pitside for opening ceremonies, and spectator access typically include families. Some of Sprint Cup champion Kevin Harvick’s best photos of 2014 include the Phoenix photos where after he won in November, about 15-20 children were outside winner’s circle. Harvick opened the door and allowed them to pose with the trophy with him and crew chief Rodney Childers. These were children that celebrated. Notice the photo of the Harvick Family celebrating at Homestead after the championship — the image of two-year old Keelan Harvick is an image of victory that has become the most popular winner’s photographs.
“…they are on a perch and do not have access to a television monitor to call the action trackside…”
That’s about as wrong as it’s possible to be about how the announce team at a NASCAR race operates.
Dale Jr found Josh Berry on iRacing, after they were competing together at the highest level.. there’s a similar situation in F1, with Stoffel Vandoorne still having sim-racing videos on his YouTube channel.
Used properly, that could be some great marketing to the younger generation – what better than to directly challenge/compete against future F1 drivers! Nissan have tried this at least with their GT Academy program, aimed more at the mainstream console market.
Your best blog of the year Joe..but is anybody listening?
Any consultant group that cannot popularise F1 in America, should not be in the marketing Business.
The problem is that there is NO marketing. I live in the States: F1? What’s that?
Actually, this is what Formula One is in the United States: http://www.formulaone.com. This website says it all. It puts into perspective all the bull that is peddled around about the ®, © and ™ in relation to F1. The sign ™ means that the trademark has been applied (that is all). And the other symbols can only be applied to the logos, not to the expression “F1”.
If the Formula One group does not even control the formulaone.com website, one has to ask just how serious they are about branding?
The website is owned by the Eastman Chemical Company, annual revenues $9 billion. In the boardroom there I suspect that they consider the Formula One group as little more than a bug on the windscreen…
Pretty funny!!!! You had me laughing out loud. Window tint, for god’s sake; how appropriate.
I work at the largest registrar out there, and I’ve handled a few accounts with F1 related domain names…and those folks have echoed this idea that FOM or whomever has never approached them for any reason. And these domains aren’t just some hacked-up similarity, it’s straight-up ‘FormulaOnexxxxx.com’ and similar. They never have anything on those domains, it’s always some toolbag with like a thousand other ‘properties’ they hope to cash in on someday. *rolls eyes (the day of the insanely valuable .com are over, my friends. BTW, Joe, email me for tips on your domain registration).
Never take on a man who can afford more lawyers than you can. It may be bullying but that is realism.
Indeed!
So that is where Bernie gets his rose tinted spectacles, then of course there is http://products.herbalife.co.uk/formula-1 a meal replacement milk shake
“,,,what I am trying to highlight is the potential that exists for the sport in the US…”
…or just maybe it is all it’s ever going to be, a marginal form of a marginal sport. Viewership may reach 500,000 per event,but that’s hardly anything to crow about.
In ’77 & ’78 with Mario Andretti competing at the sharp end of the grid, and winning the WDC, there was no appreciable uptick in Americans following F1, and 15 yrs later when Michael was racing for McLaren,there wasn’t any change in viewership…and you don’t get any bigger names in US auto racing then them.
You hit the nail on the head in your last full paragraph with what was in parenthesis.
Brits in general and FOM in particular don’t understand America or the American sports market. It’s different. Not necessarily better, just different. Whole most working class Brits generally like Americans, the haughty upper class look down their nose and sniff at us ‘Yanks.’ And who runs F1?
I’m an expat Brit in the USA.
There will be no significant US interest in F1 until an American driver is succeeding in the sport. Americans like to watch Americans win, it’s not by accident Americans are crowned “World Champions” at baseball and (American) football every year. It’s like the Tour de France – when Lance Armstrong was winning the sport got attention, now it’s completely off the radar.
A bunch of foreigners, driving strange foreign cars, with strange foreign brands plastered on them? That’s a tough, tough sell. I live in cosmopolitan part of the US, goodness knows how low recognition of F1 is in Kansas or Iowa.
NASCAR, like (American) football, is quite a boring sport, made enjoyable by all the hoopla and beer and BBQ that does with it. If you try to watch a NASCAR race on TV, for half the final laps you will be watching reaction shots of the lead drivers wives/girlfriends, not what is happening on the track. NASCAR clearly knows it’s all about the personalities. You need American personalities in F1 for F1 to succeed in the US.
It gets LOTS of recognition here in Iowa…but only from one or two people like myself. I actually found another person at the brewpub last week who knew an F1 driver. I almost fell off my stool out of shock when he went on a semi-racist rant about Hamilton winning the title.
Hi Joe,
I would love to see CVC out of the picture completely, but sadly isn’t the most likely buyer another CVC-style private equity like company? As you’ve mentioned, floating F1 is no longer an option in the short-medium term, the teams could never organise themselves to do so … so wouldn’t we be left with more of the same?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “Running a GP in a place like Azerbeijan has little interest for manufactures Mercedes Benz, Ferrari, Renault, and Honda. The only things they grapple for here is a seriously dwindling television audience and the points that go to the World Championship. Likewise for sponsors.
Perhaps it’s time the manufacturers them selves flex their muscles and say ” we have no interest or desire to be racing in Tinbuktoo. We want yo race in the US, where we sell and manufacture vehicles ( Mecedes, Honda, and Renault via Nissan/Infinity). It’s my opinion that if they banded together and made a very public push for it, not a whimsical behind the scenes closed door, hush hush whisper to Mr.E, but rather a United statement, all four manufacturers together stating that having an additional USGP is their desire and that they are appealing to the governing body to make this happen as soon as possible, it just might happen. The manufacturers together have a tremendous amount of pull and leverage. It’s time they use it.
The fact that CVC are bankers and have that short-term gain mentality that played such a large part of the recent financial crisis shouldn’t be overlooked. Joe’s comment to this effect is spot-on. the effect on F1 is likely to be similarly catastrophic.
Bernie wants to grow F1 in the US only as long as he gets paid every step of the way. He’s ‘advanced’ in age, and can’t likely live long enough to reap the benefits of a long-term strategy. I’ve watched as another international sport has grown over decades, from zero coverage to a loyal core group of followers and grass-roots participants.
I’m 43, and as a youth, played baseball. Soccer was nowhere to be found, even at the local or school level. Slowly, over the years, it began to spread, including hosting a World Cup in 1994. I attended games of the Women’s World Cup in Chicago in 1999 and the participation was fantastic. Today, every community has a youth soccer program competing successfully for participants with traditional American sports like baseball. International sports can be successful here because America is very ethnically diverse, and the demographics are becoming even more international.
In addition to the short-term profit mentality of Bernie and CVC, one of the other big problems is the lack of coverage on the news. With Bernie’s licensing fees for the replays, no local network will invest in F1. However, racing does get plenty of coverage when there’s something interesting, even on the general interest morning national news programs. Mark Webber’s crash this weekend aired nationally on ‘Good Morning America’ for a 30 second spot. Do you think that a WEC race demands payment for highlights?
Maybe if the whole thing craters, then someone with an ounce of promotional skill could buy it up and start building for the long-term. My concern is that if it craters, Bernie will pick it up for a song and we’ll be back in the soup again.
“…………….. My concern is that if it craters, Bernie will pick it up for a song…………….”
By contrast, this is what I’m hoping for
Ahhh, but wouldn’t you suppose someone, somewhere, might have other thoughts on that scenario?
The FIA, perhaps? has to be done with their agreement after all…….
They must have learned something by now?
Some people around F1 live in bubbles and don’t think about very much
Funny how such a little man has created such a monster sized problem.
Actually, it’s worse than you say. Not all percentages are equal. A 40% drop in the rouble makes the race 67% more expensive for the Russians.
This is why I am not a financier. Sometimes I wish I was
Let’s accept the fact that CVC are in it for the money. Even if Bernie goes, they are still in it for the money. Joe, perhaps you can use the back of the envelope in which you receive the next subscription to Grand Prix Plus to do some numbers to show increased profits from proper exploitation of F1 in the US, then invite Donald Mackenzie round for a nice meal and explain it to him.
Donald Mackenzie thinks he is putting putting value into the sport and reckons that critics do not understand. I took this to be astonishing delusion and arrogance, but I am happy to listen to any argument he can put forward.
Sir, you write that you are ” happy ” with the compensation package I presume.
Joe,
This Yank thanks you for your analysis. And I agree with your main point: the US market opportunity is being squandered.
I would add, however, there is a new wrinkle to be reckoned with: young people in the US are not only NOT becoming auto racing fans, they are less and less fans of autos in general.
It was recently reported that roughly half as many 16-year-olds in the US have their full drivers’ licenses as they did 40 years ago (roughly 25% vs.50%). Adding to this falling away is the rise of texting and car services like Uber that, while convenient, diminish the need for young people to own or have access to a car. So the association of car ownership and freedom isn’t there like it was for people of my age (53).
In other words, if F1 wants to penetrate the U.S. market, it will need to engage in the self-promotion you describe. That effort, however, ought to take into account that many younger people in the U.S. (and in other developed countries) don’t have as personal a relationship with cars as they once did.
One positive in favor of F1 in the U.S.: younger people here are far more likely to believe in the reality of climate change, and would probably be more receptive than their elders to appreciating F1’s hybrid technology and efficiency message (even as that message is barely mentioned by F1 itself).
It may have something to do with American foreign policy
over the past fifty years…
The crux of the problem is that F-1 is not an American product. There is nothing that is more elitist and Euro than F-1. Even though football/soccer is played by a great number of youth in America it is still considered a Euro sport and the pro game has little traction in US. Three of the four major American sports are purely American and the fourth is adopted from Canada. Nascar/stock car has a local track that runs Wednesday and Friday night races the majority of the year. Indy car has the 500 which is an event like the super bowl which gives it some relevance but really only for that race.
Tennis/Golf has more relevance in the US (even though just as elitist) because the players are visible, show personality and some are American.
F-1 in the US is a niche product that will mostly interest D-bag rich people who want to impress each other. As a Senior Manager/Engineer of a large engineering firm, F-1 interested me but the colossal waste of money to race an ugly over engineered carbon fiber POS has diminished my viewing to less than half hour on my DVR
I hate to say this but the biggest D-bag BE might be right about who his target audience is. My Iphone tells time as well as my wife’s Rolex and my King Ranch Ford F-150 is much more useful than the C class my wife drives around. Even though I have followed since I was young and have money I do not really buy any F-1 advertised products.
A lot of Americans like European chic and elitist things.
“European chic and elitist things”
I once went to a fancy restaurant in Cape Cod aimed at people like that. We drove up in a Mustang convertible. The head valet looked horrified (every other car was European) but perked up when he heard our English accents…
That is true, but those are mostly (I think) the coastal “elites”, and their children attend the “elite” universities where they are taught that Global Warming/Climate Change is going to kill us all, plants and animals and insects, if we don’t Change Our Ways Right Now(!). Those of us between the coasts, and those of us on the coasts but in small towns believe that Weather Happens. I do believe that our globe has warmed (my state of birth was about half-glaciated some 15K years back, and its geology shows glacial moraines), but it has warmed and chilled over the millenia when there were no factories. SUVs, and no real coal or oil burning regions.
Other: I’ve watched FI races on ABC’s Wide World Of Sports, ESPN, SPEED, and now NBCSN. I’m happy with their announcers; I can deal with commercials, not having known anything else. I see no way for F1 to come back to the Indy 500–the cars are just too different now. I’m not a NASCAR guy; can’t tell the cars apart except by color, and they too are spec racers. The Indy cars–well, can’t tell them apart, either, and I don’t like the announcers.
Chaz, you have your perspective, I have mine. I am not a D-bag, and calling people names really gains little traction in solving the problem. I don’t wear a Rolex, or any other wrist watch. My iPhone works just fine. I also don’t drive a pickup truck, and personally find them juvenile, with their big macho radiator grills which say “Get out of my way”. So don’t assume all Americans feel like you do. We all have our own opinions.
I’ve been a passionate F-1 fan from when I was a little nipper, watching “Grand Prix” with James Garner. I remember watching the Monaco GP on ABC Wide World of Sports, with Jackie Stewart commentating. I mourned the death of Ayrton Senna. I have always been fascinated with the technology of F-1. As a teenager, I used to build the model kits, when I could get them. I’ve said this before; F-1 needs the U.S. more than the U.S. needs F-1.
With that in mind, F-1 isn’t the only racing series in the US that has problems gaining traction. In all of these posts, one could substitute “IndyCar Series” for F-1, and the conversation would still make sense. Heck, you could even substitute “Robin Miller” for “Joe Saward” along the same theme. We cannot even embrace our own open wheel series, which is home grown, has some American talent. Last year we had an American champion, Ryan Hunter Rey, and after the season ended, he disappeared off the radar. Aside from the Indy 500, IndyCar gets very little promotion, attendance, and attention from broadcasters. Like F-1, IndyCar’s ownership seems to exist in a bubble. For instance, despite the demand of the fans and sponsors, the powers that be in IndyCar feel it’s wise to curtail the season by Labor Day (the American traditional end to Summer) in order to not compete with the NFL. C’mon, that’s what DVR’s are for. Combined with a rather late start to their season, the result is a really long off season, with limited testing, keeping the series out of sight and out of mind. Hardly a way to generate momentum. This is with a series that offers excellent on track action, and much better at providing fan access (what few fans there are) unlike F-1, despite being a spec car series. NASCAR, IndyCar, and IMSA are all competing to find sponsors, with some owners looking outside the country for the money to fund what is largely a domestic sport. The big money is not going to fund racing when there are so few eyeballs watching. Even the Indy500 is but a shadow of what it used to be. NASCAR still has big numbers, but they too are on the decline- oh, and you are so right Joe, about the “Sizzle being better than the Sausage”- watching these cumbersome tin tops go round and round is like watching a flushing toilet…(again my own opinion).
I also think that “American Exceptionalism” has a lot to do with Formula One not gaining traction. America has somewhat digressed in the world conversation since conservatism has been on the rise. “Unless is comes from ‘merica (sic), I’m not going to have anything to do with it” is an attitude that, while not universal, still prevails among the very demographic which F-1 hopes to reach. The whole racing universe has done a very poor job of trying to generate future fans. NASCAR has probably done the best, but still has fallen short. BTW, big mistake, Mr. B, for poo poo ing social media. Todays kids now have a permanent kink in their necks because they are looking down at their phones.
I know I don’t provide any solutions, but hopefully have given a “bigger picture” of the problem F-1 in America faces. What Formula One needs is a big dose of reality.
Made my day to be thought of as a juvenile at 55. I’m going to do some burnouts on the way out of work.
Great analyses from inside the problem. So are the F1 people using American or European marketing people?
Marketing? LOL
Perhaps a yes and perhaps a no to that comment, as Donald Rumsfeld succinctly put it a little time ago… “there is the old europe and there is the new europe”.
We all know who the new europeans are now, just think back two to three hundred years…
Yes but F-1 is still going for the 1%, not the general population. I have lived too long in Texas to really see a love of things Euro.
I still own land in Latvia (I know not Europe) and traveled/lived in Europe other countries however I really do not relate to many European chic or niche things.
But dammit, those Americans don’t believe that “car racing” and “chic and elitist” mix, NFW. Example: On TV I saw an American snobby-girl judge diss a sports-car-themed art video as “trashy,” while your co-judging fellow Brit Simon Cowell defended the presenter and said it wasn’t trashy. It’s a rooted cultural attitude. Solvable, but only by a sustained deluge of promotion. Ask the motorcycle industry. Until the ’70s, if you rode a powerful motorbike it was assumed you were a hoodlum, or a Walter Mitty with very poor social judgement.
I’m not sure the motorcycle industry in USAnia has changed much; although the group riding monstrous Harleys these days are more likely to be real estate agents and orthodontists than one-percenters they still look like the latter. Also, where are the sports bikes?
Says it all really!
chaz! If you hate F1 (and all it stands for, and its audience, and its technology and the continent it comes from) that much, why in the world do you spend time reading blog comments and posting about it?
Yeah, seriously. Wtf, Chaz? Take that toxicness over to MLB or college football, please!
Hate is a harsh word but the the simple truth is the sport is not home grown and not very accessible in Merica. Most of the tech is adopted from the aircraft industry, neither new nor revolutionary. The engine Tech is nice but the rest is Meh (the RBR flap on a spring was really high tech).
Not sure how the sport could be marketed in US to make a dent in the overall Merican sports universe. On SI, racing is the 11th sport on their list after MMA and Boxing. I don’t think there is a magic bean that will make this sport every popular in Merica.
Indycar has the same demographic issues that F1 does. The National Guard was lambasted in Washington because their sponsor of Graham Rahal’s car, when Indycars’ main demographic isn’t in the age group to join the National Guard.
If I held a position in Indycar, I’d look at F1 and say, “Lets do everything, they’re not doing”
It’ll be interesting to see how the current oil depression affects the bling of the Arab bazillionaires.
And I think Austin could easily be added to the term “…strategically-unimportant spots…”
From a spectators point of view, the ticket price is important.
2015 British Grand Prix at Silverstone £345 per adult & £65 per car parking.
2015 FIA WEC Race at Silverstone £40 per adult & no mention of car park price.
With all due respect, I think you misunderstand the American market. There are several problems with trying to market F1 in the US.
1. The US sports market is saturated. There are four major sports leagues that have a constant supply of games for viewing/attending. Which leads to….
2. F1 (for now) has only one race in the US. Aside from racing (or, more specifically F1) fanatics, most people are not going to go out of their way to catch 430am races that are scattered across the globe in places many Americans couldn’t locate on a map if they tried. Which leads to…
3. Americans are xenophobic. (I’m American, by the way). F1 is viewed with suspicion by most Americans because it’s a bunch of foreigners. Also, the gearheads want to root for Chevy, or Ford, or Dodge. It gives them a connection to the (American) cars they drive. Similarly…
4. F1 is an elitist sport for the wealthy. I know you spend some time in the US. Talk to some gearhead NASCAR fans in the US. Ask them about F1. Not many, in my experience, know or care much about F1. If you can’t interest the gearheads in the US, how can you expect to reach a wider audience?
I hate to support Bernie, but perhaps he understands the US market better than you think. He may have concluded a long time ago that it isn’t worth chasing after a market that is pretty much unattainable anyway. It’s much easier for him to chase the dollars in the Middle East and Asia. Besides, he doesn’t seem to really care that much for developing fans anyway. He just wants the dollars.
F1’s marketing model is rooted in 1960-era upwardly-mobile aspirations. It is a hopelessly outdated model because US society no longer marches relentlessly upward. Most Americans realize the USA has become an oligarchical banana republic. Subsequently, the market has changed. Apparently Bernie and the CVC richies don’t see this as they fly overhead in their private jets.
Admittedly, there are a few thousand rich Americans watching F1 who will buy a $25,000 Hublot or Rolex because of F1. That’s a market Bernie understands, because he IS one of those types. F1 is certainly competitive in that tiny sliver of a market. On the other hand, there are (for example) about 100,000,000 poor Americans who will live on macaroni and SPAM for 6 months so as to save enough money to buy the latest pair of LeBron James Nike basketball shoes or a Kevin Durant OKC Thunder jersey.
Which market would YOU rather dominate?
If F1 wants to compete in this market, they are in deep trouble because the NBA, NHL, NFL, NASCAR, etc have a 60 year head start. And all of those organizations do what they do EXTREMELY well. The New York market Joe eyes so longingly already has the Knicks, the Nets, the Islanders, the Rangers, the Giants, the Yankees, the Mets, and so forth. For the Rolex buyers, NY already has the US Open, The Hampton Classic, The Westminster Show, the US Equestrian Team, etc.
For F1, the train left the station long ago.
Joe,
Remember the F1 teams today employ few Americans and have little interest in doing business within the USA beyond automotive and computer software. I have tried for over a decade to get F1 marketing people interested in understand how to pitch to the US corporate marketplace but few have any understanding of ow to do business in the USA and how to talk with….not to, the US consumer. Sadly too many of the Sponsorship people just cannot grasp the best way to attract the biggest sporting nation on earth and how to work alongside them to develop F1….sad but true. Big US backed have come and gone from F1 but few people in the US actually closely follow F1 because away from TV there just isn’t the impetus from the commercial side.
The track in Texas has provided some great races thus far and American races are good for European tv viewers as they go out in primetime over here. It would be win-win to have another GP in America…….I always pine for Road America which had some mind-blowing Indycar/Champcar races back in the day……
Mike, I too pine for any kind of racing at RA, especially F-1. However, like Watkins Glenn, Road America would essentially have to be re-made. The track would have to be widened substantially and paved run off areas would need to be added or expanded. That’s just the track. All those buildings you see at the COA? Formula one likes to have lots of buildings at their venues. Being a fly away race, each team would need their own little castle in the paddock, garages would have to be built. A massive grand stand along the start/finish straight would have to be built, a big international press center added, not to mention a big nice club for the 1%ers to hobnob…see where I’m going here?
Short of all that, I would like to see F-1 cars racing on the track as it is, but I’m afraid the FIA would never certify it for racing.
I once had a conversation with an executive at Indianapolis Motor Speedway when the USGP was there and its future was uncertain. I mentioned how stupid this seemed long range and he said the F1 people were like none he had ever encountered in years in the sport. “They want their money and they want it now. They don’t care about anything else.” Of course, it might not be surprising that the teams are short-term thinkers — they want to win this week’s race, this year’s championship; maybe they think about next year, but nothing further. That’s what they want the money for. But the people who run the sport need to have a longer vision. But instead they encourage such thinking, looking for money wherever they can find it with no thought to the future of the sport.
One lesson from Nascar — do not ignore your heritage. Nascar stumbled when it expanded nationwide too fast a couple of decades ago. Then it tended its southern roots and those fans returned. This year, there is once again a race in Darlington — the oldest superspeedway — on Labor Day as there was for decades. F1 needs to understand this: take care of your fans and they will take care of you long after the latest oil Sheik has drifted off to a new play group.
It should be noted, Joe, that the average American home receives dozens or hundreds of hours of NASCAR-related broadcasts through cable channels in any given week, whereas F1 gets…maybe 6 hours(on a race week)? NASCAR has 2 direct ‘junior’ series that often feature the top runners (there’s the Sprint, the trucks, and the baby Nationwide group) as well as dozens of regional short-track races and series, all of them given prime slots across multiple networks to get eyeballs on the screens and butts in the stands. The fact that the stars of the top series sponsor, operate and drive in the others brings much more interest to the entire group.
As a passionate open-wheel fan I KNOW there are several feeder series for F1 but not a single one of them gets any air time, except the very very rare weekend when they’ll show the GP2 final at 4AM, bookended by 2 solid hours of infomercials and interrupted by same. I’ve dropped by often enough to complain about this that your comments readers know why F1 just isn’t a big deal here. Obviously we could ask if the interest is because of the series, or if the interest is due to the lack of any effort to promote it here in the US. Chicken-and-egg deal…but both the chicken and the egg need a decent spot to roost. We havent got that. There is no ‘home’ for US F1 passion, no network with multiple channels and feeds like SKY/BBC, nothing. Just NBC spreading the various parts they do air on 3 different paid-cable channels without much in the way to let fans know just which channel they should be watching.
I keep hoping that someone with some responsibility in the matter will read my posts and take it to heart and work to make changes. F1 cannot and will not get attention in the US using the same tactics as other US sports broadcasts (stuff full of commercials, rinse, repeat). You can watch a thousand hours of NFL pre-game commentary, in-depth analysis of every play, pass and tackle of every sinlge game, but F1 gets a half-hour pre-race show (maybe…and that half hour has, you guessed it, 10 minutes of commercials) and they’ve cut the broadcast before the podium ceremony on more than one occasion. Frankly, one of my favorite features of the SKY broadcast is Ted’s Notebook. The US comparative, Will Buxton, doesn’t get even a fraction of the time Ted gets on air. These are all little, seemingly minor details that add up… NBC, FOM etc, this is yet another wake up call. In order to grow your US audience and make something of it, you can’t just let US broadcasters run the show. Something has to change. Do it differently. Break the commercial rights BS and allow SKY to stream in US markets (that would be immense). ANYTHING but the current process.
All good points. I pay for a VPN just so I can watch the BBC’s coverage of F-1 on their i-Player. Even their highlight package is tons better than what we get from Liegh, David, and Steve. I like them, but geez, the BBC does it so much better, as did ITV when it had the rights. Almost like watching a different race. Also, you cannot substitute broadcasting live from the track with guys sitting in Charlotte watching the same world feed we see, and, like you pointed out, the commercial breaks. They take away any continuity. There does not seem to be the same feel of energy emanating from US broadcasts of F-1.
It is a shame because there is so much to be gained from the technological prowess of the teams that can be used in the auto industry for the road cars. It would be great for not only F1, but for the American audiences if perhaps Ford or GM were coaxed into a works team. I think it would be more realistic for Ford to venture in again, given their history in the sport. I have low confidence in the Haas program. I really don’t think he knows what he’s getting into. Would love to see a Ford-Penske team take it to Ferrari, Red Bull, McLaren-Honda and the rest. However,Roger Penske is too smart of a man to get into F1 in its current state.
Joe, as an American and a rapid F1 fan I appreciate your concern about F1’s apparent lack of understanding of the US market. However it’s never been my impression that Ecclestone, et al. give three damns about things like appropriate race location or attendance. Ecclestone wants his up-front money for granting the race, then his annual money for letting the promoters run it each year. If he could make more money running a race in an empty desert, he’d run it in an empty desert. (Oh wait, he sort’ve does that already.) I would say the same thing to you that I’d say to Jean Todt about the WEC: You want a massive enthusiastic crowd for your race? Hold it at Sebring. You’d draw 100,000 fans on race day and 250K for the weekend. But of course Sebring doesn’t come remotely close to meeting the racetrack standards of the WEC, let alone F1. So these races will continue to be held at a venue where crowds range from pathetic (WEC) to passable (F1), and where there is no historical significance WHATSHOEVER. Fans? Who cares about fans? It’s all about extracting as much money as possible from (typically) short-term promoters, then moving on to the next sucker in line. Just ask the IMS.
Actually Interlagos is steeped in history, as are Le Mans, Spa and many other WEC venues. But I take your point.
thank you monsieur Reeves for your brave comments. well done sir.
I have just been reading some of the garbage that Mr sylt writes for Forbes he don’t like you joe,, what a a.. ole keep up the good work
I find pity a better emotion than hate. The poor little chap is just afraid that he will be found out and will end up stacking shelves in Sainsbury’s/Walmart…
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall meaning. Proverbs 16:18
What is the point of quoting from the Bible to an ungodly motor racing crowd? Why not simply say: Pride comes before the fall? In my experience religion and motor racing are competing activities on any Sunday and those who try to have a foot in both camps come across as hypocrites. The “I just want to thank the Good Lord and my sponsor Rusty Nails for my win today” attitude comes across as completely fake. It makes me laugh when you see the behaviour that goes on in the sport being hidden beneath a godly veneer. Not to mention the fact that the racing where this happens most has its historical roots in whisky running. And if you don’t know what I’m talking about Google Lloyd Seay, Roy Hall and Raymond Parks.
Here endeth the lesson (as they used to say on 1662).
“Lord we thank you for this wonderful oval, the majestic chevys and fords that glorify your name. Lord please bless all the drivers and keep them safe, and lord please bless the sponsors, perky jerky, hooters, coca cola, bud, and our armed forces for protecting the freedoms we enjoy to eat perky jerky, by your wonderful chevy and ford automobiles, attend hooters, have a bud and praise your creation”
Maybe that’s part of the disconnect between F1 and potential American fans There are a whole lot of people who don’t see the religious trappings of racing in America (“invocations” delivered before NASCAR races, etc.) as incompatible or hypocritical — notwithstanding the bootlegging roots of the sport and that all involved may actually be unbelieving as a beast.
At least they both have something in common… both F1 and the Church fleecing their congregation on the “Sabbath” (the day of rest… yeah right)
Unfortunately F1 missed a golden opportunity to establish a foothold in states. In the nineties, F1 pissed off the sports mothership, ESPN, by pulling the plug with the move to Speed Channel. The move meant losing millions of households who didn’t have access to Speed. Then to demostrate your point about short term thinking, ABC purchases ESPN, which had the added advantage of cross promotion. NASCAR rode this wave from a southern region sport to a national presence. In the meantime, F1 tied to the low 200k viewers and no promotion of Speed Channel. For goodness sake, on any Sportscenter broadcast time is allotted to soccer highlights! Ten years ago, there was no mention of futbol! In this same time frame, F1 has been mentioned on the Indy tyre fiasco, McLaren $100m fine, and Schmacher accident.
Our only hope is for ABC to purchase F1 in the coming years. There is an ongoing war between NBC Sports and ESPN. By purchasing F1, ABC could be putting the screws to NBC sports. Plus it would be great fit with Disney and excellent impact on the books. Just think how a marketing giant like Disney could use Hamilton, Vettel, or Rossi to promote the franchise across the different platforms.
In a strange way, F1 reminds me of jazz, the beautiful art form, which loved and revered in all corners of the world except America!
ABC/ESPN purchasing F1 is a new concept to ponder, but if they do it will hardly be for the purpose of putting the screws to NBC. As extensively mentioned above, NBC’s F1 audience is meagre. ABC must have plenty of cheaper ways to wage that war.
Brilliant, Joe – thank you for a very enjoyable piece of reading. Will re-use your “exit strategy” logic!
The US racing seems to have gotten closer to your heart…any specific reason (more than your Arizona son?).
Great piece as always. Unfortunately Alexander Rossi just announced that he will be seeking a ride in Indy Car henceforth.
I believe that is what my post says.
I have quite a few problems with this article.
First, there is the notion that Alexander Rossi would move the needle. F1 popularity in the U. S. was not exactly boosted by Scott Speed. Rossi carries no more appeal than Speed, and in fact brings less hype as he did not have the Red Bull Driver Search behind him. Americans would not watch a competition of who can stare at a wall the longest just because an American entered it. They care when an American 1) does something interesting (what people do is what makes them appealing) and 2) is good at it. F1 is not interesting to them, and Rossi was not very good at GP2.
Then, there is Simona de Silvestro. She raced in the middle of the pack in a series that draws about 300,000-500,000 TV viewers on cable. Hey, wait, that’s what F1 gets in the U. S., too, on that channel (if you add Spanish TV, it gets more)! She’s not well-known to the American population.
And that negates many of your numbers. It’s a nation of 300,000,000, but even NASCAR can only get 4,000,000 of them to tune in. 55,000 of them in attendance. You can pine for the Black Friday sales numbers, but not even NASCAR has the same number of fans as Black Friday has customers. Realistically, what would F1 have if it did penetrate the U. S.? 3,000,000 viewers? Better than 400,000, but making your numbers irrelevant.
Next, Qatar and Azerbaijan are called strategically unimportant. Yes, if the strategy is what you want it to be. But the strategy is precisely what you lament: raising revenue in sanctioning fees instead of in ticket sales. You can disagree with the model (in many ways, I do), but it is not strategically unimportant IF that is the model. It’s like saying a jury is wrong for convicting someone of drug trafficking because you think marijuana should be legal. That’s great, but it isn’t, so you apply what the law really is. Here, you apply what the strategy really is, and with that reality, Qatar and Azerbaijan can be important.
From there, once more, we talk about going after 300,000,000 consumers, which first assumes every single person living in the U. S. is a consumer, and assumes F1 could ever make a dent in that number. I’ve addressed that already.
At least those numbers are real. Your first comparison is between NASCAR TV REVENUE and F1 total PROFIT. How is that fair? NASCAR brings in more TV revenue (no expenses included) than F1 makes after all its expenses. That’s not, as you’d say, rocket science. Of course NASCAR with 0 expenses makes more than F1 with 100% of its expenses!
Next, we have the bogus attendance figures. Do you know how many NASCAR tracks even have a capacity of 100,000? 8. And believe me, they weren’t full. Places like Chicagoland and Homestead that hold 55,000-60,000 people were full. Places like Texas with 138,000 seats looked woefully empty.
So, we move to your 40% are women. I’ll buy it. But what’s F1’s for comparison? It’s irrelevant free-standing.
Then, we talk about age. That NASCAR-generated number of 7-17 year-olds is not reflected in reality. Go to a NASCAR race. You won’t need a fancy education to count that high if you were to play “total the young people.” Reality: NASCAR’s median TV viewer is 55. F1’s, in the U. S. on NBCSN, is 48 (younger for Spanish-language U. S. coverage as the Spanish-speakers in the U. S. are, as a whole, younger…I want to say it is 36 median there). NASCAR’s not young and America as a whole has an aging population. If we want to play stereotypes, F1 may go for the Rolex-wearing elderly; NASCAR has the shirtless elderly.
The U. S. is oversaturated with sports, let alone auto racing (NASCAR, IndyCar, NHRA, IMSA, SCCA, all kinds of it). It’s not an appealing market. You make the “this is a multi-billion dollar industry, if we could get even 1% of it” argument that many a failing business makes: it’s a big industry because it’s crowded, so you’re not getting that 1% of it. F1 will not appeal in the U. S. more than it does now, which is enough to collect a few million USD from cable TV and host a well-attended race (maybe two).
By no means do I disagree that F1 has a problem with how it obtains revenue. I just think you’ve found the wrong solution.
Sorry to hear about your problems.
Some valid points well made.
F1 is about as big as it’s going to get here. That’s how it is. Except for Global Rally Cross (which really isn’t global or rally..) and Supercross none of the current motorsports in the US are seeing any growth in younger fans. Even when it’s on network TV it struggles to break a million viewers. It can make some money here with those numbers but the thought of it getting much bigger in the US indicates a lack of understanding the US market.
I disagree. Markets are not static things.
Joe, I agree. Take Austin as an example. Folks there basically knew nothing about F1, but now there is a core of local folk who follow it at one level or another. With added locations, the same would happen. Do it in three places and a bit of momentum would build. If in addition it was backed by decent marketing by FOM/FIA/whomever, plus marketing from Mercedes, Infiniti, Honda and other brands with a US presence, the audience would grow steadily. Not remotely to the level of the top sports in the US of course, but to double the level of awareness today should be achievable and profitable.