The post-Melbourne stories have focussed on how F1 can be fixed. This, of course, assumes that it is broken, which is an interesting discussion. My view is that the sport is OK in terms of its ability to deliver messages to the world, but it is playing with fire by heading towards pay-TV only. The other point is that it needs to rethink how it deals with its followers.
Pay-TV is probably inevitable given the economics of the sports industry, but there are different ways to switch over. Going for premium pricing is not smart and cheaper bundling deals might be wiser. But the financial people don’t care about anything but short-term gain so the sport is stuck. What is also required with pay-TV is an active and integrated social media programme to attract new viewers, but F1 is still in the Neolithic Age when it comes to electronic media and – more importantly – the art of engagement. That latest Stone Age act is to switch much of the f1.com content to pay-per-view, which I fear will result in some disappointment at Princes Gate when the numbers start coming in…
The sport needs to understand how to make its fans feel loved, which assuredly it does not do at the moment. The problem, of course, is the philosophy of screwing every buck from every possible source. The suits may be happy, but the fans assuredly are not and with pay-TV now the big thing, they are truly fed up. The big teams are squared away and not troublesome because they have had some whacking great pay-offs. However, this has created a situation in which the have-nots are skating on very thin ice, not only because of the unfair distribution of prize money but also because of unsustainable engine bills. This is the primary problem in F1 today. The engine suppliers must be forced to lower their prices. This is essential for the health of the sport. The manufacturers could afford to do it, but no one has the oomph to tell them that this must be done, in case they walk away. The only people likely to quit are the losers, as the sport is too valuable for the winners. It would be useful now to have a Cosworth-like company to provide solid cost-effective power units if the big players will not play ball.
If the teams had cheaper engines, the budgetary problems would ease. The secondary step would be a different distribution of prize money, but that is not going to be an easy fight.
The other thing that would really help the sport is to become more user-friendly. The teams are struggling more than ever with tougher pass restrictions which are aimed, it seems, on driving sponsors into VIP hospitality. But the actual result seems to be that more sponsors are responding by having off-car deals and hosting their own events away from the Grands Prix, which allows them freedom to do what they want to do, which is not the case at races.
In terms of spending, the teams have pretty basic fixed costs, which can be reduced with some gentle weeding of the regulations. If the engine problem is gone the budgets are much more manageable. The big teams spend vast amounts on research and development in technology that has no great value outside F1. This makes no sense. The idea of banning wind tunnels is an interesting approach as it would put the emphasis on CFD and better simulation tools, which might be more useful technology as it can be applied in other fields beyond racing.
The decision-making structures as they are today make it hard to get anything done but there are still some questions about whether it not the current arrangements are in line with competition rules. It would be good for this to be sorted out quickly. In truth, it would have been much smarter for the racing authorities to have asked about the arrangements before they were put in place and then all would be clear. As they chose not do this, then they must face any challenges if they come. That will make it harder for the finance people to sell the business but that might be a good thing. There may be worse jackals out there…
joeblogsf1 
It amazes me that whenever it comes to the performance gap most people point to the engines straight away. My problem with that is that half the grid had the same engine as the GP Winner and all performed differently, Do you demote Force India and Lotus right to the back of the grid so Red Bull can get back in touch with Mercedes? Especially when their engine supplier has purposely held back more tokens than everyone else for development?
So of the 4 teams with the race winning engine and allpaying the same fixed cost for those engines what is the differentiator what is the variable cost that makes the difference between Force India and Mercedes, the answer is Aerodynamic research and yet Mr Horner (Because he seemingly has the nbest aerodynamicist) thinks that there should be more influence on aero so his team can dominate again.
As well as costs, the aerodynamics of modern cars mean that they can’t follow within a second of each other without burning up their tyres in turbulent air and then you end up with gimmicks like moveable front wings and DRS to compensate.
Forget the engine argument, there are enough teams with similar performance to compete for the title if all else was pretty equal. Instead hugely reduce the scope for aerodynamic development and give cars more mechanical grip through new tyres. That way its less of an advantage to have a great windtunnel, or huge banks of computers and a bunch of aero guys trying to bend every rule as much as their new parts bend. Of course there has to be some leeway as development is and always has been what drives F1, but for it to be the huge differentiator that it currently is kills off the spectacle of the competition.
As for F1.com. Have they put everything behind the paywall? They have premium features behind a paywall but that was the same last year, you had a basic timing screen available free and more advanced one through the paid app. This year though they’ve done enough to convince me that it may actually be worth £2.50 a month. Rather than last year where all they had to offer was a very unreliable, difficult to use app which had to be paid for upfront, no monthly payment choice.
It’s quite obvious to me they’ve started to take social media seriously despite their erstwhile leaders musings and while maybe all is not anywhere near perfect as yet, they are moving in the right direction finally.
The more I hear about how F1 is run by Bernie, the more I wonder if he’s recreating the situation that led to the Truck Acts.
Spot on. I didn’t bother getting up to watch the race or any of the practice sessions even though I had the weekend off and lots of free time. And I was shocked (but, on reflection, not surprised) when I went on f1.com to look for detailed information, to find a badly redesigned website which was going to be charging me from April onwards.
I like the new rules. I like the new engines. I’m not a fan of domination by any one team/driver, but the others apparently haven’t done the job to catch Mercedes.
Having recorded it, I watched the race on Sunday afternoon, and was bored stiff. Hopefully Malaysia will be different as it’s the first proper racetrack on the calendar, and hopefully Alonso will be in the car and Manor will be able to run (perhaps even beating McLaren-Honda given the Woking team’s travails in Melbourne? That would be an amazing story). However, if it’s another Mercedes demonstration run to the flag with little else going on behind, I might just cancel the Sky F1 subscription and settle in to enjoying a year of intriguing racing in the WEC – a formula that heavily promotes the technological and fuel-efficiency advances its competitors employ in the top class, and which features close and compelling racing across four classes with top line drivers throughout the field.
I want the new F1 to be a success, but it has to sell itself better and tell its story. That’s not happening and it is a crying shame.
Are there any figures on viewer levels available, Joe ?
Paywalls do not work except for the truly dedicated, see the failed experiment by the New York Times. It will only serve to reduce the numbers of fans even further, and give casual fans even less desire to get engaged with the sport.
With regard to social media, this does need to improve. However I don’t think providing some kind of live interaction/feedback is the way to do it. The biggest problem with this is the global nature of the sport. Apart from the decreasing European rounds, I wonder how many folks watch the flyaway races live? I’m an ex-pat Brit in the U.S.A. And from a personal point of view between kids and time schedules I never get to watch qualifying or races live. This sort of social interaction would be useless to me.
What I did enjoy was the added depth from the radio messages. I want to hear what is going on, how they are managing problems with the car for instance. Give me the background to the chess match that is unfolding. This is the kind of drama that draws me in, knowing the guy behind could potentially catch up if he pushes just that little bit harder. I didn’t even mind a certain amount of “coaching”. It’s all very well telling the driver were he is losing time. It is a totally different ball game executing on those instructions. Again it just improved the quality of the races. We want more information, not less.
There used to be a guy on Twitter that posted the FOM pit-lane channel live, and after the race. This is the sort of info I crave and inevitably ended up watching the race a second time with this extra information (almost like a commentary track on a DVD). Again the restriction on radio messages has essentially neutered that too.
“That latest Stone Age act is to switch much of the f1.com content to pay-per-view..” Well, Bernie did say that they were looking for a way to monetise it and I am sure that the desired demographic can well afford to pay.
Trying to get my head around this, Joe, but surely making or forcing the engine makers to lower their prices just means they will pull the supply if there’s no commercial sense in supplying at below what they feel is a price that they want to sell at?
I’m not entirely sure if the balance is right between what the teams need to survive and what they can rake in by means of sponsorship and prize money, but they need to be able to generate so much cash per year to stay viable.
So the prize fund needs upping to a basic floor to give all teams sufficient money to survive on, even those at the bottom. That doesn’t happen now as we have seen.
Sorry if this doesn’t fit the circumstances, but as you have said for a long time, too much is going out of the sport for it to survive, and Mercedes, Red Bull etc will pull the plug if they see that it is not in their interest to stay in the sport.
If they do go, then it will be the end of the sport as we know it.
Peter
I never thought I’d say this, but my time as an F1 fan may well be coming to a close. I am certainly not paying any more than I already pay for seeing the racing, so I guess I’m not visiting F1.com anymore. Besides, this season is looking like there wont be much interesting racing and there isnt anything to miss. so I wont see all the races. For the first time, i have no plans to attend a race this season, because of the lack of racing, and I’m really sad about that.
it’s a shame, really, this really used to be the best sport in the world. now, it is going to become the modern version of Prize-Fight Boxing. just pay-per-view viewing, controlled by the underworld. sounds like a great, new F1.
“It would be useful now to have a Cosworth-like company to provide solid cost-effective power units if the big players will not play ball.”
Maybe I misunderstand your point here. In the past, you’ve made it plain that success is proportional to budget – the only way to level the playing field for teams is to restrict their expenditure. (And I agree.) But how could a Cosworth-like power unit achieve consistent success when the development budget would be inherently lower than that for Mercedes/Ferrari/Renault/Honda? Wouldn’t we just go back to the days of the Non-Turbo Race within each Grand Prix?
Unless you mean ALL the teams would adopt the cheaper power unit? Is that a realistic prospect when there are manufacturer teams?
“But how could a Cosworth-like power unit achieve consistent success when the development budget would be inherently lower than that for Mercedes/Ferrari/Renault/Honda?”
The cost of hybrid technology falls every month. Much of the knowledge is published and shared.
Companies who make IC engines can integrate hybrid technology; they know how to make engines and other people know about energy extraction. Experts working with experts.
Currently it is difficult for an independent to challenge in F1 to Mercedes/Ferrari/Renault/Honda. When everyone understands the technology better, smaller companies will find partners, creating companies that astonish us.
Off topic Joe, but do you see De Tomaso as an upcoming name in F1? Maybe the mole has heard something?
It’s a good job they are not using 6-8 engines PER WEEKEND as we always used to!
Well thought out as usual but the real issue is the constant crushing of anything vaguely innovative in the sport which results in millions per tenths in aero. Look endurance racing for a model, genuine differences in technology and approach which has a use.
I for one have no intention of following pay per view. NO I don’t get it for free at the moment, I pay the BBC a licence fee and where do you think the money for adverts on other channels comes from – it is in the price of what I buy. If you want a good idea of what ppv can do for a sport, look at the viewing figures for cricket before and after.
I wonder how long even the bigger teams will be happy with the ongoing move to Pay-TV? A perfect way to kill drop-by viewers!
Potential sponsors must have evaluated how much the audience reach will be dropping and decided the value is a lot less and so the amount they are happy to pay per square inch on a car surely will have dropped significantly? McLarens trouble getting a Title Sponsor seemed to coincide with the date of UK TV coverage partially moving to Sky?
And as far as keen fans are concerned, the ones who don’t have a sky setup are most unlikely to be tempted into buying the whole package needed to watch all the races! Hell, I have sky already, but I am not willing to fork out an extra £40 or whatever it is a month on top for the full Sky Sports package just to get a couple of races a month. When it was £10 extra to get it as part of HD, that was ok, but to be expected to have to subscribe to 5 or 6 dedicated sports channels which have zero interest apart from F1 to me … No chance!
Australia has just gone to half free to air and half pay TVs , minimum cost of Pay tv is $600 12 month .
F1 is the only thing on there that I want as I used to have pay TVs & dumped it for Netflix $120 12 month .
If there was an F1 App for $120 per season that I could watch , I would jump on it as for now the only option is low quality Illegal streams , how many others are in the same boat ?
It’s actually $750 if you are a new user as you have to pay for the box and install
I completely agree with you.
I unfortunately don’t earn enough to warrant spending that much money just to watch F1 which is a joke in my opinion. Sports are for the fans, and if I can’t watch F1 anymore then they’ve lost a fan.
And thanks to the loss of the German GP, that is one less race we can watch as it was one of the “free” broadcasts on Channel Ten.
If F1.com did race streaming for a $100-200 fee per year I’d be all over it.
Agree. Give me a F1 App where I pay up to AUD $10 per race weekend for live streaming and I would subscribe. I enjoy F1 and previously have tried to watch all the races on free to air, brought merchandise and subscribed to magazines. But, I will not pay Foxtel for channels I have no interest in. So, in 2015 I predict I will catch some of the free to air races. However, I also predict I will learn to live without F1 and move onto other hobbies. So, in short order – 2016 – I am likely to no longer be engaged with F1. The sad part of this is it would mean I have less desire to subscribe to great e-magazines like Joe’s one.
Exactly the same thing here. (U.S.). I totally agree with you and would pay the same, no more. Currently getting my fix by paying for GP+, and if I’m awake during race time I am looking at the “play-by-play” on PlanetF1 which is an extremely poor substitute for either TV or radio. However if no other viable options come up I am more and more likely to just find something else to interest me, I will not be returning to regular pay tv just for F1. I reckon I have a maximum of two years before being gone as a fan for good. And I am not good enough at the internet to determine which illegal stream will or will not cause a virus or some other infection…
Times 3, I had last year’s WEC app and loved the live coverage plus in car footage it provided. Why can’t F1 do something like this. Every country needs to monopolise their viewership with broadcast rights. I have been a rabid F1 fan for almost 30 years and HAVE NEVER missed a race, watching pretty much all live coverages. Being an ex Foxtel customer of 8 years, I see returning to Foxtel as a big waist of money as they do nothing but repeat the same shows adnauseum. It’s not worth it just to get F1. I am severely disappointed with F1 right now and contemplate forgetting the sport all together. What a shame.
Jim, unfortunately it seems every illegal stream causes some nasty side effect. Even clicking on a pop up to remove it can also be a confirmation to load some malware. I’m no expert, but if, say, I were to use a site, I would run a cleaner straight after.
I thought F1.com was going into reverse when they removed the sector times from the live timing. I used to love that data – seeing Webber 2s a lap faster than anyone else in Hungary one year was a particularly memorable moment.
I don’t mind the current arrangement in the UK, although I’d never pay for SKY out of principle. The problem with highlights is missing the build up to a particular pass or incident; it’s like seeing the ball in the back of the net without the previous passes or missed tackle that lead to a particular attack.
Anyway, the current arrangement pales into insignificance when compared to watching 30mins highlights on BBC2 at 11:30pm in the 1980’s or groaning when the Wimbledon final went to 5 sets while the French GP was on.
If you’re happy with watching delayed coverage I would recommend using the Hola Unblocker proxy plugin for Firefox or Chrome to access the BBC programming. I guess it’s illegal since those programs are available only to UK residents, but I justify it to myself by noting that I would happily pay for a monthly subscription if it was available…
Wow, awesome, I tried it and it seems to work. Now just can’t find the race itself…Is it on there or only for a limited time? Thanks!
When you look at the split of Free and PayTV for Australia, all of the timezone friendly (i.e. daytime) races are on PayTV (with the exception of Melbourne, due to Govt regulations which mandated it be on free to air TV here).
Then for the PayTV races, 3 of those are in North/South America (Canada, USA, Brazil). As these are on in the early hours of the morning in Australia (3-5am typically), only the truly dedicated Aussie fan will get up to watch them.
So that leaves 7 races at $85 to watch per race. Sorry, but I just can’t justify that.
Alas, I see this purely as a money grab by the suits, and when I say “the suits” I am really thinking of Bernie.
I’ll add here that the Australian Pay TV coverage (which we watched after coming home from qualy) promised “no ad breaks”. What that meant, in practise, was that we were offered a split screen view of Q1 (which was mid-session) and advertising side by side, with the advertising given audio priority.
Awesome stuff. Well worth the investment. Another year of crappy F1 coverage in Australia. Time to go back to the live streams/downloads…
Foxsports do have a great range of motorsports now though (ie pretty much every major series). So for those like me who are into Indycar, WEC, MotoGP/2/3, V8SC and Nascar it really does represent decent value. CWC was an added bonus.
Although getting it just for F1 would be a bit steep.
I was genuinely excited in the run up to last weekend. Being a Mclaren fan, my excitement sort of leached away as the practice sessions passed by, but I’d have watched the race (I’ve not missed many over the last couple of decades). However, the combination of the early morning timing and it being on Sky (which I don’t have) meant I couldn’t watch it live. Having heard that the race was a bit of a procession, I didn’t even watch the highlights. I’ve still not seen a 2015 car in motion.
I’ll probably watch about half the grand prix this year – the ones on BBC. If the championship warms up, I may pay for a couple more, but not them all. You could argue that the viewer should pay to view, much as they now do for football, but I’m very unlikely to stick my hand in my pocket until the show improves.
So on sky you can just pay for single races if you have it at home? That’s interesting how much does it cost per race? In Oz it’s the whole season plus some silly ball games for $750. That’s the only option…
£6.99 for a day pass, £10.99 for a week. Work on PS, Xbox, tablets, Roku and Chromecast (apologies if this reads like an ad, it’s not, I don’t even use it as I’m a Sky subscriber).
It’s worth mentioning that F1 needs to protect and preserve its heritage. The core following is European/UK and US-based. New markets are fantastic and I understand why manufacturers like the exposure, but relentlessly divorcing F1 from its historic circuits is a travesty. Again, that goes back to money, but if you think of it, the long view suggests that heritage is valuable as business “good will.” Good will is hard to quantify but essential to brand value. F1 is harming that sense of good will with its followers by racing in dodgy places with little more to offer than a check.
“It’s worth mentioning that F1 needs to protect and preserve its heritage. “.
Impossible, its heritage is dead… real circuits (i.e. Brands Hatch, Nurburgring, Zandvoort etc), real drivers (not celeb-culture overpaid PR mouthpieces), real engines (not green “PUs”), mechanical racing machines, not CAD-derived mobile computers
If you had been around in the 1950s would you have said the same without Brooklands, cloth caps etc?
Bad analogy. The progression and development of formula one thought the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s was positive for the sport. The progression and development in the 2000s has not been positive for the sport. Yes, that is in my opinion.
No, because the elements I noted; Green idealism, celebrity-culture, and IT, have only become prevalent in recent times. They are ubiquitous and sadly no aspect of our lives is immune from them now, F1 included. Of the 3, I’m all for IT, but only where applied and used appropriately for things that could not exist without it (cars did and can). The Green agenda is insidiously controlling our lives, and as for celeb-culture, need I expand!
Um, Jackie Steward, James Hunt, and Ayrton Senna were very much celebrities. I suppose you would have opposed the safety campaigns of the 70’s?
Yes they were celebrities, but “celebrities” and “celebrity culture” are not the same thing. Back then, they were their own men, in spite of media attention.
Of course a healthy amount of safety is important, but it’s gone too far and ripped the soul from F1… ask yourself why those drivers of old got into their machines, machines they KNEW were potential death traps.
F1 should be about the elite showing their skill at performing to the boundaries that are beyond those of us ordinary mortals, not living in a cotton-wool shroud you know. I know, let’s print “motor racing is safe and drivers are all corporate zombies” on tickets.
I agree benM, obviously those making absurd remarks about safety and celebrity, are not being sensible. No one would want to return to the days when drivers could die or face serious injury at every event, however carbonfibre chassis, which has massively increased driver protection, was used by McLaren from 1982, so it is not a new technology, and probably saved John Watson’s life at the Italian GP that year.
As for celebs, the way drivers behaved in the days of JYS & Hunt, hasn’t changed, JYS was much different to Master James, which is why he was much more successful too! But the real change was that in the 60’s & 70’s a fan could actually speak to the drivers, and I remember doing so.
The last time I spoke to JB was at the Clay Pidgeon in his Karting days!! To speak to even this most self effacing of guys, would not be possible for a fan now. However, it has not proved a problem for me to have a few words with the most successful FIA World Champion of all, 9 times WRC Champ Sebastian Loeb….and that is why WRC pulls tens of thousands out wherever it goes, all day action, and drivers who want to communicate with their public! Simples!!
Well it’s the F1 World Championship in discussion really and the demise of the spectacle of Brooklands (which never hosted an F1 race) was more than offset by the variety of circuits that appeared worldwide as the Championship grew along with the teams and drivers that drove the sport into the mainstream. The heritage of F1 lay in that and that they are now being discarded on mass is to the detriment of what purports now to be F1.
I was not around in the 1950’s. There is no heritage cherished in f1. Where is the F1 Superbowl, the Grand Slam tennis or Major golfing events? Where is the Twickenham, Wembley, Wimbledon, Neu Camp, Maracana, Madison Square Garden? Or the Melbourne Cricket Ground or Lords, Wrigley Fields?
Or even Indianapolis, Le Mans or Bathurst?
The powers brokers in F1 don’t care about yesterday and the stories of glory that it brings and the narrative that it tells, they only care about tomorrows money.
Good point Tim Evans. I wonder if there is something lacking in how drivers develop? In the past those taking part just loved racing and motorsports. Over the last 20 years or so, things have moved on, as in other areas of modern life, so that the aspiring youngster is on a treadmill from 6 or 7 in Karts, and being trained to just “win” with little or any knowledge of what the Prizes mean in historical terms, but only the objective of being “famous”. Some, like Vettel, do seem to have a rounded look upon competition, some like Hamilton have started understanding the importance of certain races in the great scheme of things. Others like Schuey, only really understand the full picture when they approach retirement.
In motorsport, as in human life in general, history is important, but often overlooked by people who only figure that the future is the most important thing. However, if one doesn’t understand the history of things and why certain things happened in the past, then one is condemned to repeat the failures of past times, and not appreciate the glories of those times.
Not everything about the past was great, but then not everything about the present or future is great either. Because something is over and done, doesn’t mean that it has no value in considering how things are in the present or how they should be in the future. The huge sums of money being thrown around these days are a prime example of what has gone wrong, and why motorsport is having less relevance to modern life, and why it will dissipate unless some lessons of the past are learnt and reused. People don’t need glamour, the need a connection to channel their feelings and enable them to understand why they want to watch something or be a part of the atmosphere of it. The current 4 year period of 2014 – 2018 is having more effect on all of us, particularly the young, than the slightly more recent happenings of 1939 – 1945, and other war theatres since then, like Korea, Suez, Aden, even the Falklands. The thread of history has really connected the young of Great Britain, with their Grandfathers’ and Great Grandfathers’ and the plight of their Grandmothers’ etc, left at home and subject for the first time in history, to aerial bombardment amongst other terrors.
The huge increase in Historic motor racing and rallying isn’t just nostalgia, it involves people bringing their kids along too, and family days out as was the case before motorsports became too expensive, too elite and too out of touch with real lives.
Until that connection is restored, motorsports will continue to die out as those of the older generation pass on and are not replaced and no amount of “social media ” or You Tube or Twitter or anything else, will solve the problem. Only having motorsports run and organized by those who really love the sport and are passionate about it, can heal the rift and bring the sport back to relevance. And if you want to know who can do that, well there’s no one at Sauber who seems to get it, and the same goes for 90% of those participating as team owners, sponsors, drivers, and all the way to the rights holders and the governing bodies right up to the FIA. It’s quite tragic and has all the hallmarks of a collapse of an Empire.
I wouldn’t. The safety features of today’s cars I believe have minimized the dangers of some of the traditional circuits. Not all. Obviously, the Nurburgring (14m) is not one of those circuits. Zandvoort, Brands Hatch, Imola, and Watkin Glens yes.
By “heritage”, the OP referred to circuits and the regions where F1 races are hosted. It’s not possible for modern-day F1 to race at Brooklands, but the same cannot be said for rejected venues like Germany, France and (?) Italy. The deal between Monaco and Bernie tends to suggest that even Bernie knows that historic circuits have meaning. The question is how far to push.
If it’s not racing from one city to another then back again, on open roads, over the course of several days, at great risk to everyone, it just isn’t Grand Prix racing to me.
If ever a sport has constantly grown and evolved it’s F1, you just sound like an old stick in the mud harping back to the era you deemed to have enjoyed most, through what I expect are very rose tinted specs
All sports are having to evolve in the Internet age, when not only the means of consumption but also in the vast amount of competition for time is having a huge effect
Back in the ‘good old days’ F1 pretty much had Sunday to itself, no football, no other major sports, limited other TV, even he shops were shut!
Now days here’s a huge amount of competition for air time, it’s not attracting a new audience, like football it has to move on and to be fair (night races etc…) it has in a number of ways, is Pay TV the right way though? Perhaps. I’m not sure if the current model is the right one though. It seems a singular source PPV seems like a popular option here, I’m sure they’ve looked at it, is the market mature enough for hat yet though?
CAD is just a more efficient way of drawing the machines. Would you expect every team to still hand draw the drawings for all of their components ? Technology is great. I assume you’d think the occasional death would be ok too ?
Hnad drawing of all components is Christian Horner’s next proposal. Mr Newey isn’t a big user of CAD.
And if they’re banning wind tunnels, maybe Mr Horner will sell me the 13’x9′ Bedford tunnel for a song?
naca… with respect, i’d wager you’ve probably never spent time working at the “coalface” end of what is produced by CADCAM in F1. Nothing is “drawn” anymore; so-called “design engineers” simply spend all day “clicking”, then out comes a CAD print-out, which is invariably wrong because Mr. or Mrs. designer has probably been distracted by something (i.e) social media, and has likely never been taught proper basic, nevermind advanced engineering skills. More efficient? yeah right.
In the days of manual draughting, there were no such distractions, less places to hide, and engineers had to make intelligent decisions themselves, not by resorting to a computer every time they were stuck.
Deaths? No one wants that, but motor racing is DANGEROUS and the risks are obvious. Tell me just one driver that is being or has been, forced to drive – against his or her will?
I agree, technology IS great, when applied intelligently to create something that couldn’t have been created without it. Did cars and racing exist before CADCAM came along? in F1 it is simply an abuse of technology.
Why do you think Adian Newey works from a drawing board?
BenM…with respect I disagree. I am a winemaker now, but spent years in aerospace designing composite tooling, then years in marine engineering designing mooring systems, equipment for offshore oil rigs, tug boat equipment, etc. etc. and always used CAD/CAM. The ability to make 3D models, check interfaces, quickly change things, the ability to do FEA, and then quickly produce a production drawings or go directly to machining was/is fantastic and vastly improved both my product and my production. As a person who is hand drawing impaired CAD saved my ass and is a fantastic tool.
Thanks for reminding me why I don’t go anywhere F1 teams any more.
Everyone thinks they’re smarter thsn the guys further up the chain.
The bolters all think they could design a better car than the cad monkeys. The cad monkeys all think they know better than the aerodynamicists.
The bolters in the race team all think themselves superior to the factory staff of any skills.
The rampant egos in most F1 teams something I don’t miss.
You sound like an utter joy (not) to have as colleague (assuming from your comments that you’re currently in an F 1 team but not a designer ).
Adrian Newey does use a board (at least he did when I worked under him) but his drawings are scanned and put into 3D cad. It allowed him to concentrate on the “big picture” but he used the outpug ov other people’s CAD CFD and tunnel data. The actual car is designed on CAD.
Which heritage would that be. The heritage from the ’90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, 50s or 40s / pre-war?
Should we bring back front-engined cars by any chance?
Occasionally I’ve watched footage from some of the races that my childhood self recalled as being “great” – and some of the racing was dull as ditchwater but because we couldn’t get much of it on TV it was always exciting at the time.
We should enjoy the “now” which is F1 2015; there is so much to celebrate; the dominance / excellence of the Mercedes, the apparent revival of Ferrari & Sauber, the potential menace of Honda lurking at the back (they won’t be there for long). One day we’ll look back at this and say “that was real F1” – ’twas ever thus.
Now there’s an idea nickplanas…front engined F1 cars! Do you remember the T tray 711 March, The bulbous Tyrell 001, the wedge Lotus 72, the Gas Turbine Lotus 56 or the Twin Front Radiator ” Lobster Claw ” Brabham BT34 and following Triangular twin front rad BT42??
Those were exciting, and greatly differing F1 cars. What have we had now for 15 years other than cars that are more or less identical? If you painted all of them white, they’d look the same and you wouldn’t be able to tell them apart really.
So are things better now? Answers on a postcard please! By the way, a postcard was how we all used to send greetings to our families and friends when we were on holiday, before the great days when we could send pictures on snapchat and other modern media! And although modern phone pictures can be useful at times, the latest thing seems to be taking pictures of folk jumping off buildings in suicides or as this week, picturing a teenager dying in a knife attack outside a Club….yup, technology does have some great advantages over the old ways of doing some things!
Meanwhile, back to your front engine comment…..see Nissan beat you to it with their new front engined WEC car….not innovation as such, but totally refreshing and far removed from Bernie’s One Size Fits All approach.
It seems that by a drip-drip effect we may well come to the point where the bulk of team funding is via Bernie’s bank account. In order to maintain the required number of cars he’ll increasingly have to bankroll team by team as each starts to sink under the costs and lack of sponsors. Once Red Bull up and go there’ll only be Mercedes left that are fully, comfortably self-funding.
A pay wall on F1.com is utterly amazing.
I completely understand why some sites move to this model. People think if its on the internet it should magically be free to view and free of ads which is of course idiotic but that’s when you’re buying content, not promoting your business which F1.com is arguably there to do.
I don’t think this is isolated to just getting new viewers though. I know quite a few people who’ve watched every race for years and have dropped out because they don’t think it’s worth the money or because they’ve just lost interest.
I don’t think F1 should be free to consume but I think many people will be wondering whether its a luxury worth having these days.
I don’t know if Kimi picked up a penalty for the next race because of his pit stop incident but there is a classic example of the idiotic things happening in F1 – if he did, for the next race we’ve taken one of the second fastest cars out of contention and ruined the battle between Kimi and Vettel.
If he sped in the pit lane and slammed into his pit crew sure. But its this kind of nonsense that starts to add up.
I would be thrilled to be able to pay F1.com $120 per year to watch all of the races live or later (at my discretion, not theirs). Other than that forget it. I don’t see why this cannot happen. Throw in practices and qualifying with perhaps high-quality races of yesteryear and I’d be preaching the gospel and buying the t-shirt as well…There is no way that Bernie or anyone else that has anything to do with F1 and/or its broadcast makes anywhere near that off me any other way.
Watching it live on F1.com will never happen. This is because it would undermine the billions that the paytv operators currently pay Bernie.
In addition, it would expose the drop in viewers that F1 has experienced over the past decade. Currently they can fiddle the numbers through the definition of “views” in order to keep the sponsors interested.
By having direct subscriptions, the exact viewership would be possible. A potential sponsor would then be able to more accurately gauge the audience against other cheaper media options.
Has F1 been free to consume since the arrival of commercial sponsorship? F1 is a very fast, global billboard – why so many slow to medium corners on Tilke tracks?
The reduction in sponsorship deals (remember HSBC, Vodafone, Becks, Orange etc) means the viewers may be paying explicitly rather than the previous implicit arrangement. Santander seem to be the only brand in the UK that is fully activating its sponsorship e.g. JB’s 123 ads. Maybe the pub that sponsored Caterham are doing a good job too?
Bizarrely, a means of reducing costs at small teams would be to fire their marketing depts; if the driver is bringing money and the rest of the sponsors are related to the owner then why bother paying a dept to look for a needle in a haystack? The (apocryphal?) days of Rothmans ringing up and asking to sponsor Williams are long gone.
It’s taking a while for the effects of the 2007-8 credit crunch to shake out; it’s only really hit my industry (aerospace) in the last year or so.
“Santander seem to be the only brand in the UK that is fully activating its sponsorship e.g. JB’s 123 ads.”
Interesting example, given the complete and total lack of Santander stickers on the current McLaren…
On the Kimi incident I rather agree but I’m still amazed that F1 teams still find wheel nuts such a complicated component of the cars. I’m not sure whether the availability heuristic is playing tricks on me but it often seems that there are more retirements due to wheel nut issue than engine failures.
Joe a very interesting over view. I think if you look at your very eloquent and informative words they contain part of if not all of the answer.
For a long time now both the jackals and snakes have killed off the SPORT of motor racing called Gran Prix for there own gains.
My own educated point of view having spent many years being part of motor racing F1 and later involved with C.A.R.T from the early years. The craziness that has become F1 should now be left alone, the vermin that have taken control (not Bernie I like him got real history together) which have tried to influence the real path of motor sport will very soon devour themselves. My opinion is leave well alone because the greed, all the falling out no matter how they try and re gig the rules the end is in sight for F1 to what we have seen it become today.
Every person who loves this sport knows it is now big business, every race, every media report about the drivers spats all the bollocks that seen to go with every race just turns people off by the bucket load. Pay for view !! are you fools that would become the death nail for all concerned players/fans every one.
The real answer lies with the people and teams that really want to go racing to put on the show. Just like Bernie did all those years ago the original concept.
A Trans European formula with a open house towards engine builders i.e. Cosworth, Merlin, Nicholson etc type builders. A team budget towards development of either there own or bought in chassis i.e. Reynard, March, Lola I know these are old skool examples but I’m sure you will get my drift. Looking at certain electronic restrictions, To have ONE governing body to cover all aspects no RAC!. Then on a yearly basis re gig the rule book according to improvements to both track and teams without p—–g every one off.
You now have a situation (Germany) who no long want to play this F1 game. Take your bullshit and go away (although in the constitution of country’s agreement they have to hold a GP. Originally 5 country’s took that pledge). Although things have moved on from that Concord agreement and the various riders to the original agreement/contract (never written down) it was those simple pledges that made the F1 show what it is today, the very sad thing is they have since all been forgotten in the wake of BIG MONEY BUSINESS
.
A new Trans European formula would re boot proper motor sport that every one understands with the minimum of political issues run by one governing body.
Not talking a upbeat club racing formula; but a formula that has real financial cred proper sponsors who could afford there presence in this sport instead of being frightened to death by spiralling cost and litigation.
Rather than sitting on the fence like so many people do waiting for the next reaction join the UKIP of motorsport elect Jeremy Clarkson as you new spokesman. (Ha a new type of litigation)!.
Change it now, sit back and watch the F1 rats start to eat each other!!
Hear hear jonny….couldn’t agree with you more! By the way Joe, I’ve got 2 comment replies on the Guido piece you did, awaiting moderation. I just wondered why my comments always seem to take a long time moderating, but other people’s seem to go without moderation? I suppose you have some filtering system to stop comments breaching your blog rules, but is there also some newbie period where new blog readers get monitored for a year or so to make sure they behave?? Just wondered that’s all!
Because I have been busy doing more important things.
Yes Joe, I have now seen your comments on how your time was spent, of course none of us knew the personal part was so delayed, and I hope it went as well as these things can do. Best regards to you & yours.
I guess I’m looking at the glass half empty. I see fundamental problems that need fixed. Primarily this revolves around the distribution of revenue, the disparity of spending between teams, and the general lack of everyone pulling the same direction on the rope in matters financial. The politcal/governance situation in the sport is terrible. With FOM, FIA, and the teams really needing to work together more.
As for pay-per-view. I will not pay to watch F1 (unless I go to the race in person). I have followed the sport closely for 25 years and been a fan since I was a kid (I’m 46). If Bernie wants to lose more fans, pay-per-view is the way to go. Also, it’s not a way to grow the fanbase in the U.S.
I’m about your same age and have been a fan for even longer and am also in the U.S. – Aren’t you already paying for F1? I realized that I was paying a lot to see F1 as it was about the only thing that still regularly interested me on cable/satellite (family is a different matter!).
We cut the cord, got Netflix/Hulu/Amazon for $25/month total and invested in 3 HiFi Antennas for $120 total and in the last year have watched EVERYthing that we used to including NFL and the only thing missing is F1. Couldn’t be happier except for the F1. As I stated above I would happily pay $120/yr or about $5 per race weekend to watch the show. Please, someone, take my money!
A scrappy boxing night costs some 30$ and you want whole F1 weekend for five bucks? Get real.
I don’t think I’d be willing to pay $30 to watch a boxing match live from the front row, let alone my living room… If F1 really has anywhere near as many viewers as Bernie likes to claim, then $5 a race is easily fair. It is unlikely that he grosses that much from his small chunk of the Cable broadcast.
Exactly this x 1,000,000. £6 max for the race weekend, high quality streams online or on a smart tv app or an F1 channel on freeview/freesat or even sky (ha !). I missed a few races last year and didn’t even watch the highlights. I’m wondering if i’ll bother watching Malaysia live this weekend on the beeb ?
To clarify, what the rest of the world calls “pay TV” is not the same as what the US refers to as pay-per-view.
Pay TV refers to content delivered via cable/satellite/etc, which requires a monthly/yearly subscription (i.e. Comcast, DirecTV, etc.) Pay per view generally refers to special events (typically things like boxing or MMA fights) where you pay a one time fee to a content provider for viewing rights for that one specific event.
To the best of my knowledge, the only way to see F1 in the US (without resorting to nefarious means) is via pay TV. There have been a couple of races here and there which have been free to air on NBC (Monaco and Austin, possibly others), but the vast majority have been on NBCSN, which is not free to air.
Like others have mentioned, I’d happily pay up to $200 a year to be able to log in and either stream or download the races (quali and practice sessions as well), and be able to watch them at my leisure. I honestly can’t see this happening with the current management… which is a shame.
Already having highlights on BBC is conditioning the audience away from F1. BBC attracts 3.5m viewers, SKY 0.5m. If the BBC decides to drop F1 it’ll become a niche sport in the UK because the casual viewer won’t bother or can’t pay to watch. So you’re right. There’s no point in having a spectacle if no-one is watching.
I agree with your entire post. I’ve been a keen follower of F1 for forty years, and if I were asked to justify my demand for free coverage I would have no real answer except that I can’t afford it. Or at least, I can’t bring myself to pay that amount of money, or anything like it, for what the sport has become. When the MCC sold out to Sky I walked away from Test cricket with some regret. When the BBC finish with F1 in three years, as they will, I ‘ll find it much easier to turn my back on it. And if anyone suggests that this makes me not a proper fan, maybe they’re right. Although I still watch every session that the BBC show, I have little regard for what we’ve got now.
Joe,
Might I suggest a couple of things:
1) Reduce the engine bills to the teams the benefits are as you have stated
2) Increase the number of engines allowed in a season to at least 1 per race weekend. As it stands now, the fans of latter season races can only look forward to a rash of 10 place penalties for their favorite drivers or at best “detuned” engines plodding along, just to make the next race or two.
While we are at it:
1) Bring back mechanical grip:
a. with wider tires
b. banning diffusers
Thanks.
Wes
I think there is definitely a big problem in terms of engagement with fans; I’ve been following since the early 90’s but never felt quite so detached from the sport. The costs for a fan to attend races are extortionate nowadays, especially compared to other motorsports that offer at least as good an actual racing show. Even watching on tv has now become too expensive as you say.
Sorting out sustainable, realistic budgets for the teams looks ever more urgently needed, as does costs for the race organisers. We now have no French or German GP this year, with the Italian GP apparently also under threat. This seems absolutely crazy given the number of European companies involved in F1, not to mention the roots of the sport on historic tracks. Watching Monza or Spa is always a more exciting event than tuning into Bahrain, Russia or Abu Dhabi, but the shift to more races in countries that neither care about F1 (nor get built decent tracks) seems to continue.
While WEC might not steal many F1 or casual motorsport fans (races too long), it looks a lot more friendly as a sport to follow these days. Maybe F1 needs a serious rival in order for those involved in the sport to stop shooting themselves in the foot – the core product doesn’t have much wrong with it, but everything else needs fresh, unbiased input.
The jackals will run away when the hyenas get involved. I was told by someone involved in the production that when A1GP was doing deals, the people doing the tv deals were paid by commission. The biggest immediate money was pay tv, so the deals were done with sky etc. But no one was watching, no casual viewers started watching. A1GP went belly up. Seems like all the F1 money men want an English Premier League situation. F1 is not EPL it will, it never will be. It can and is generating huge sums, but it is a very different animal, and will never generate EPL money.
You should talk to Jonnyrocks above, he likes Jackals too. Poor Jackals, what they done to deserve this – now it’s Hyenas as well!
One key aspect of the Premier League is that it’s surprisingly egalitarian when it comes to dishing out the cash to each club.
Spot on Joe.
FWIW…
I gave up going to GPs, because it seems you needed ‘a pass’ even to take a pee.
I gave up watching live GPs on the telly, because of the switch to pay-per-view in the UK. Once I got into the habit of waiting for the highlights, I soon begin to watch all the races on catch up, sometimes with a good deal of fast forwarding.
I’d say it was only through blogs like yours that my interest in F1 was kept alive, because most days you have something new and interesting to say. So that keeps me ‘tuned in’.
I eventually ended up with SkyF1, after the kids demanded cable telly, and it was there in the bundle. I have to say, I like it a lot. But I’d never have paid the however many hundreds extra it was, just as a stand alone product. So if the ‘suits’ decide to go that way, then it’ll be a Bad Thing. People will watch something else, and the grass root interest will die completely. As happened with cricket.
I agree with you, Joe; particularly as regards the, seemingly, ever spiralling costs of being an ordinary F1 fan. To follow a complete season on TV (in the UK, at least) I have to pay Sky £25 per month; the irony being that the F1 channel seems to be thrown in ‘free’ so long as you subscribe to the ‘main’ sports channels. So F1 fans are, effectively, subsidising the exorbitant cost that Sky pays for Premier League football, cricket, rugby league and a shrinking amount of rugby union. I’m a rugby union follower – so that’s just about the only other sport I’m happy(ish) paying for.
Why can I not ‘buy’ the F1 channel as a stand alone package?
In addition, having been able to use the ‘live’ timing screen (with sector split times) on the F1.com website until last year, I did succumb to paying for the F1 app on my Android tablet at the start of last season, when it became clear that the sector split times weren’t going to be provided ‘free’. I paid – I think – under £10 for the app, which wasn’t completely outrageous, especially for an app that provides data that the ordinary fan had never seen before (and probably didn’t understand… I may have understood what most of the screens were telling me by the end of the season – maybe not).
This year’s version of the app is £20 – give or take a few pennies. That’s too much – and it doesn’t seem to be as user friendly as last year’s – I could just about to get one page to appear as a whole on my tablet’s screen; no hope of doing that this year.
I’ve been following F1 – as a fan – since I was about 8 years old. I saw my first live race – as a 14th birthday present – at Silverstone in 1977… I love the sport, but I’m becoming disillusioned with the way the supporters are constantly being squeezed for funds that doesn’t seem to find it’s way to the participants.
Hey ho… gripe over!
“Why can I not ‘buy’ the F1 channel as a stand alone package?”
You’re the first person I have read that points out that pay-to-view is only available (in the UK) if you already have an expensive pay-to-view package, then pay-some-more for the extras you really want, like F1, football etc.
I would like the media moguls of F1 to consider providing a pay-for streaming TV app with good commentary, news and comment, which I can then view on my TV by connecting my tablet (or watch direct on the tablet, ideally anywhere in the world) and be able to watch again. Too much to ask?
Last year’s app was £20 at the start of last season. I don’t know if they eventually reduced it but this year’s is a huge improvement on both the paywall part of the site and the app. Although they haven’t sorted out the subscribers being able to use both yet.
As for cost to watch races in the UK. The standalone costs can be much cheaper if you buy through now tv. 6.99 for the day or 10.99 for weekend although can be cheaper if you buy the boxes bundled with free passes. Think I paid 100 in total to watch all races last year
“Why can I not ‘buy’ the F1 channel as a stand alone package?”
For the same reason you can’t pay your TV license for Top Gear. A rolled up package of channels means that the rights holders (in this case, Sky) are much more resistant to a single sport going through a boring period.
There’s a huge difference between paying my licence fee for a range of BBC channels (mostly very good and well worth the licence fee (I’ve spent a lot of time in US watching the much vaunted free ‘TV Heaven’… It’s actually TV Hell – for the most part, including the ‘paid for’ cable and satellite channels)…
Top Gear doesn’t have it’s own dedicated channel (if you discount ‘Dave’) and therefore cannot be paid for as a stand alone programme. F1 DOES have it’s own dedicated channel on the BSB-Sky platform; Sky Sports F1. It could (if Rupe and his minions had the wherewithal) be ‘sold’ as a separate, stand alone, channel; there is absolutely no technical reason that couldn’t happen.
“Why can I not ‘buy’ the F1 channel as a stand alone package?”
Because Sky’s business model is based on cross-subsidy. Someone has to find the £5bn they’ve agreed to pay the English Premier League
Indeed… that is the reason… luckily I can actually afford it; but that doesn’t stop me really resenting it. It’s a bit like going into Sainsbury’s for a packet of crisps only to be told you have to buy a box of Shreddies and a packet of Persil in order to get the packet of crisps you really want – but the crisps are free…
If Pay TV only, is inevitable, then so is the shrinking of the audience to a fraction of it’s current size. At that point the sport will be of no interest to sponsors at all. (except maybe of the championship itself) Thus we could enter a period of common sense, though highly unlikely, where the even greater Pay tv income, and track advertising are distributed equally amongst the teams. The revenue from the circuits, I would suggest be cut in half and allow the circuit to keep half and give some security to the continuance of the race, with the GP becoming a benefit to the track instead of the burden which has seen the loss of many European venues.
However the above is merely a pipe dream, instead of common sensed we currently have Bernie calling for “equalisation of the teams”. Well it is mostly in his hands, he can stop the “off the top” payments to Ferrari and Red Bull and divide that huge artificial advantage between the back four teams instead of those that already have the most.
As for penalising Manor, he certainly believes in putting the boot in. A wild swing from him dishing out some prize money early to help not long ago, has turned into what must be an effort to kill off the cash strapped team. His strategy appears to be to support the team with the most money and seemingly invent new rules to help them. Why can he not promote F1 instead of running it down at every opportunity (mostly coinciding with the whinging of Mr Ginger)
Surely we all know that greed and self interest will prevent any revelation in F1. Maybe its better if we do loose some more teams and Bernie’s commercial agreement is broken. Then we can start with a sensible distribution of funds that keeps the sport alive, with a promoter who promotes, advertises encourages, leaving the rules to the FIA (less Todt) instead of steadily bleeding it to death. Monies to be held and distributed by the F1 trust (currently an oxymoron)
The new FOM website seems ok, but it lacks the ability to watch the race live. Of course that would be undermining Sky but if you deal with Bernie you must read the small print and the invisible print.
Re Manor – creditors got nothing and yet Manor resurrect themselves. Hardly fair on the even smaller guys. And what about Caterham? All the crowd funding and hoo ha, great for the liquidator who no doubt got lovely fees and a day at the races. Remember the guys who wrote here about the situation, what happened to them? On this occasion Bernie was right about Manor – it was embarassing for F1. The who, what and why are another subject of course.
This is the work of the administrator. Manor people had no control after administration began. That’s how it works. Deals were struck by the Administrator. I’m told that 78 percent of creditors agreed to the deal on offer. That’s how these things happen. Many creditors happy to still have the business.
I’ve seen many such arrangements in business and, let’s face it, there is very little choice for most. I’m happy for the personnel concerned of course but the list of creditors is long, topped off by Ferrari (£16.5m) and McLaren (£7m), both of which must be on a promise that continuing with Manor will return something long term. The fact that the official name of the team includes the former Marussia name means they will keep revenues for last year I suppose and perhaps therein lies the clue. For most of the others, who knows, but I can’t imagine Timo Glock (£600,000) is happy and although 78% of creditors signed off it doesn’t mean there’re happy either – not to mention the 22% who I assume are definitely NOT happy! These things do happen but F1 is supposed to be the top branch of motor sport not some back-street fly by night operation. Looking at ‘Manor’s’ situation you wouldn’t think so. It was shameful for F1 to see what happened on Sunday compounded by Sauber’s equally embarrassing saga with Guido. I thought we lost all that with the likes of Simtek.
“The new FOM website seems ok, but it lacks the ability to watch the race live. Of course that would be undermining Sky”
I’m quite certain it would completely contradict the contract with Sky and I doubt that Murdoch hires fools for his legal departments. Sky’s website allows Sky subscribers to watch Sky content.
So here’s my thoughts Joe .. for what they’re worth
1) F1 is a godawful mess . Just read all the negative headlines today alone about F1 ! First and foremost because its drifting too far away from ‘ sport ‘while trying to be more ‘ spectacle ‘ in order to try and appeal to god knows who seeing as how the TV numbers are dropping like a stone worldwide
2) The most immediate ‘ fix ‘ would be to drop all the complexities [ DRS KERS ] which are costing the teams a fortune while accomplishing nothing as far as improving the ‘ sport ‘ is concerned … and in fact if anything contributing to the demise of any semblance of ‘ sport ‘
3) Get out of the countries where there is and will be no market for F1 … such as Russia etc as well as those despotic regimes where no one wants to travel to … placing a priority and focus on the traditional tracks as well as those countries that traditionally have been the largest audiences for F1 [ Germany* Italy Spain Brazil etc ] but are now on the wane .
[ * The German F1 race is now officially off the calendar ]
4) For the long term fix .. wider tires [ as well as lower profile .. time to catch up with the 2010’s you know ] .. less aerodynamic aids … an increase in minimum weight … a size limit only on the motors [ say 2.5 liters ] … sans turbo/superchargers .. cylinder number and configuration up to the manufactures from 4 all the way up to 16 [ just in case Bugatti wants to come out and play ]
5) Do something about the fact that almost ALL the teams are based in the UK . Not that I have anything against the place … but its time the insularism and nepotism comes to an end and things get spread around a bit . After all … just how German is Mercedes F1 when its all based in the UK ? Answer ? It isn’t .
6) Unlimited testing … period . F1 needs to save money ? Ban all the freaking Mobile Hospitality mega units and see how much money can be saved by that alone !
7) Keep TV coverage on Cable etc … forget Pay for View once and for all … make the ticket prices more reasonable .. as well as making the drivers and the paddock more accessible .e.g Make F1 ‘ exclusive ‘ because of the quality of the cars and drivers involved .. not because you the paying fan can’t get within a 100 meters of the goings ons while the likes of Bono gets to crawl all over the place at will !
8) And on the quality drivers note . Make damn sure everyone on the Grid is … quality … rather than the majority being Pay to Play wanna be’s and token gender/race/creed/color benders that have never accomplished anything
9) Allow for some sort of limited ‘ customer ‘ cars to be available for potential new teams wanting to come into the sport that have both the resources and talent to compete … but neither the time or budgets currently to completely develop a new car from scratch
10) When a team does fold …. and even in the best of times teams do fold … F1 needs to make sure that teams resources and manpower become available [ at a fair and reasonable price ] to a possible newcomer with again the appropriate resources and talent to be competitive
In conclusion though … should F1 stay on the self destructive course they’re currently on ? As I’ve said before …
If F1 choses not to evolve in a positive way … the ‘ sport ‘ of F1 is destined to become the automotive version of Polo . An exclusive rich mans only sport . e.g Completely irrelevant with no one in the general population caring a single iota about or able to afford if they should .
But then … seeing the ongoing trend worldwide for the [ very ] wealthy to completely separate themselves from the general [ as well as upper /middle and upper middle class ] population ? Maybe becoming the Polo of the Automotive Racing World IS … exactly what F1 wants to become ! In which case … at least have the decency F1 to inform the rest of us … so we can stop wasting our precious time commenting , thinking and being concerned about F1
You covered most everything it would seem. I think the last bit was what will continue to be the evolution of F1. Enjoy or not. It is still the best of this type of racing.
“It is still the best of this type of racing.” What “type” of racing?
Spot F’ing On.
“For the long term fix”…a 2.5l N/A 16 cylinder engine! Er..no..I don’t think we’ll be seeing your solutions come to Renault’s rescue.
If you must look back to go forward then I’d pick 4 cylinder turbos, say 1.5l, then just limit the fuel. For me, the current small V6 engines are a nonsense (because nobody will do them for the road any more).
So that’s basically take F1 back to the mid 90’s/early 2000’s, but lose all of the engine manufacturers as they’re not interested in that engine formula at all.
On the plus side though, the teams will spend a fortune on testing…which nobody watches, and everyone will complain about the lack of overtaking again.
Joe; you’ve done it again. A spot-on piece summarising very well where we are at and, quite correctly, suggesting that fans don’t feel very well loved. I certainly don’t (feel loved) and haven’t felt that way for many years. As for pay per view, sorry, but I wouldn’t go for it. For one, I can’t afford it at the moment with family commitments and, I suspect that I may not be alone in this respect among your bloggers. I haven’t succumbed to the Sky offer and am not likely to; ever. I get my F1 enjoyment primarily from this blog and from the limited BBC coverage. I’ve also enjoyed the BBC Radio 5 Live commentary in the past. OK, I can already hear the giggles from some but you should try it. I agree with the fact that switching entirely to pay per view would be catastrophic for the sport in terms of the viewing figures. I for one would reluctantly have to find an alternative form of sporting entertainment. Finally, I really don’t believe that the people who run the sport give a rat’s a**e about the fans. In fact, it may ultimately be the goal of those who run the sport to rid themselves of fans altogether. We’re just not important. It’ll reach the point where the cars will be circulating, watched (on plasmas) by the Rolex-wearing people in the Paddock Club. The spectating areas on the outside of the circuit will be near-empty.
Joe, though I hate to admit it: I’ve stopped caring about Formula One (after following it since the seventies).
You know what pushed me over the cliff? The official F1 iPad app and more specifically it’s price – increasing from 9 euro’s last year to 27 euro’s this year. The live timing that used to be a service now turned sector times into stripes! You are so right, it’s all – no exceptions – about the money.
Although you did a very good job promoting GP+ and I had my finger on the button, in the end decided not to. Similarly I’ve not renewed my Autosport+ subscription (that I had since it first came online).
See, I don’t wear a Rolex and don’t plan on ever doing so. However I feel this is the audience that F1 is now firmly targeting. In other words if F1 is not interested in me, why should I be interested in F1?
Le Mans, now that is a completely different experience. Have you seen their iPad app last year – phantastic and affordable. And the atmosphere… you know what I’m talking about.
I’m left with vivid and fond memories of days past (end of the eighties, the nineties). I occasionally go out to buy Motorsport and a visit of Goodwood Festival of Speed is on.
For some reason F1 doesn’t want to share the excitement, the brilliant power train they’ve come up with and their history (good luck finding races online – legally).
There’s an often heard quote from the Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy that I feel is appropriate here:
“So long, and thanks for all the fish”
Matt above says “I don’t think F1 should be free to consume.” It is not free, and never has been in any recent memory.
In the UK, we pay a licence fee to the BBC; when on ITV, it was paid-for by advertisements. The cars themselves are paid-for by those TV rights, and by the attendees at the races, and by the sponsors… who need air time to justify their investment.
Take away the air time, shrink the audience, and the sponsors go. In that case, yes, TV has to pay for the shortfall. Except it has to pay double…
£1 in sponsorship to a team = £1 to the team. £1 in TV rights = (maybe) 50p to the team. Bernie takes a cut on all of the teams’ revenues, not just some of them. Meanwhile the teams are now beholden to Bernie for largesse; they cannot pull off a sponsorship coup and drag themselves back into contention.
And the new engines and their cost? Bernie opposed them in public (but too late), but in reality? I’m not so sure. By allowing the costs of the engines to escalate he ensured that the teams needed more money in order to survive which, in a tight economy, left them more in thrall to him and to his plans to take a haircut on all of the sport’s revenues whilst at the same time boosting TV fees. Allowing a team to fail (“pour encourager…” etc.) was helpful, too.
Bernie didn’t publicly argue about the cost of those engines IIRC; he argued about the noise, made himself look like “a dinosaur,” and in reality crystallised the argument in favour of the new engines as being “not old-fashioned.” From Bernie’s perspective, job done…
I’m sorry, Joe, but you’re wrong; there’s no “inevitability” of pay TV; there is (as you’ve oft observed) an inevitability about Bernie’s avarice.
I’ve often thought you OTT when it comes to Bernie; he has, after all, created and managed something that really has been very successful. If he simply stopped at the status quo, and developed it properly, I’d continue to accept it.
But… this is the ultimate power-play to get a hold of the real prize. For audacity and execution, we really must salute the man; I can think of few people in any industry who could manoeuvre themselves, with consent, to taking 50% of the revenues of an entire sport. He needs only to keep a hold of this until he dies (which by definition cannot be too far off); his personal satisfaction will, I’m sure, be tremendous, and he won’t have to live with the consequences.
As a businessman, my hat is tipped to him. I just wish he hadn’t done it to a sport I actually care about.
I believe everyone has a recipe for F1. Mine is that you draw a virtual box and the car has to fit in there, then you define a maximum limit of downforce the “box” can generate in its tyres and a minimum weight (not including the driver), you also include all mandatory safety equipment and tests the “box” needs to be approved in and determine that all development can be CFD only but no car simulators are allowed. To top it all, gear changes would be through a manual lever on the side and clutch. If you want F1 to be green you then determine what percentage of power should be generated by sources other than the combustion engine and then you may determine that fuel should come from the gas station. No push to pass or DRS. No pit to car changes allowed and radio communication in an open channel, one that spectators could connect to during races. Through GPS tracking, the brakes would be less effective while in track, increasing the braking distance and thus overtaking opportunities. Once out of the track, brakes would automatically go to full efficiency to help stop the car in an emergency. Runoff areas would be designed in a way that drivers actually loose time by overdoing a corner and going through it. As a cost cap is difficult to implement, you limit the amount of people who can work in a team and the amount of people allowed in the race weekend. You also determine all team accounting needs to go through one of the four major accounting companies and balance sheets published like public companies and define that, for every dollar spent over a certain limit the team must pay another dollar into a purse that is accessed by teams operating under that limit with the goal of keeping all teams close the a certain average and also used to promote young driver programs. Then you use the funding from races far away to make viable historic venues like Spa and etc and you promote a real world championship with at least two races in each continent. There’s a minimum age for the superlicence as well as proven experience in minor formulae. The teams operate as franchises and divide prize money by their performance only, no privileges. The last year’s cars can be sold down the grid as rules would be stable, exception to safety improvements. Teams wouldn’t be allowed to cover their cars or close their garages or use partitions to block view and spectators paying a small premium in their tickets would be allowed in the paddock (ok, limited availability). Rear wing endplates would have only the number of the driver in large numbers. Once a year, there would be a non championship race where drivers would be picked out of a hat and given cars from other teams to race and champions from other car / bike / truck / boat racing series would be invited to join. I believe either this would be very successful or fail miserably, but it would be so fun while it lasted!
Joe,
One thing had me thinking, going back a few previous blog posts of yours, as to how do we get young fans to watch or attend races.
I looked at Tennis, and Golf, which is either a team game or a single person taking part. One thing we all talk about with regards to tennis players, is the number of Grand Slam titles they have won. We have a list of household names, which pretty much everyone knows, but always referred to by the number of Grand Slam titles they have won. But then I looked at how many actual games they won. Take for example Greg Rusedski, at one time ranked 4th in the world, (Oct ’97) yet he won 15 titles, but no Grand Slams.
As for Golf, we always talk about the Masters and Open & PGA titles. Jack Nicholas has won 18 major titles, Tiger Wood has 14 major titles, but did you know he has 106 wins, to his credit, which is tourments, he entered and won.
So if we used the above, then why not, do something like this:
We develop a “Classic” title, for all our historical tracks. Therefore Silverstone, Spa, Monza, Monaco, Barcelona, Montreal, Melbourne, Sao Paulo, and Suzuka. With these they carry a points increase, So from 25 points to 35 points for a win.
Now most of these circuits – tracks are not doing that well and need investment. Here I would have FOM, take over the promotion of the event, and the local government instead of funding the event, use that money to improve the infrastructure to the track. The second point is that the race ticket price is reduced to a reasonable amount so a family can attend. (we want full stands – looks good on TV)
We need to keep these tracks, after all this is the actual heritage of F1, if we lose them, what is F1, what is its history, and why would anyone want to see a race.
Getting a cost cap in F1 is full of problems. But it should be done, just that you need all the teams to agree what is in the cap and what isn’t. Therefore given this would take time to sort out, I would look at limiting say the front wing and rear wing development. Here I would allow say only 5 new designs per wing, for the season. These wings cost anywhere from £250,000 per wing, and the big teams bring a number new ones to each race.
The Race Director, has a jig of sorts, and the team put the wing in the jig, and it is photograph. The team can make say 5% adjustments to that wing, but that’s all. They can mix up the wings, so for example a wing numbered 3 can be used with a rear wing number 1 for the track.
We are currently limiting the number of engines per driver – per season, so why not the wings. It will cut costs, in the mean time while they attempt to sort out a cost cap system.
No one listens to the fans. big loud engines and more of them. Electric this , save fuel bla bla bla , we don’t care.The political correctness is killing the sport no celebrates wtf , just close racing with a equal pot of money for all the teams.
Free to air coverage. Live streaming that you pay for. Historical did races, the list in endless what could be done , but no no we have some old fart who everyone is waiting to pass on ,her cant go on forever .
Then we will have a civil war , it’s going to get very messy , that’s if it last that longs.
Me and my mate don’t even bothering talking about the races anymore . Formula one is on a life support machine .
I would have got up in the middle of the night to watch the Aus GP (and then have the rest of the day free). However I couldn’t watch it live, so checked the report when I woke up – oh a dull procession. Don’t need to bother with that – I’ll go out for the day instead…
Well done bernie.
The problems in F1 are not the cars or the engines or even the technical regulations.
The problems are to do with Governance (or lack thereof). I used to think that the idea of a break-away championship was bad – but now it possible the only way to go.
Sharing your knowledge of F1 financing, along with the passion with which you write about the sport, does provide a solid case for not going off F1 completely. I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry at the show in Melbourne, though.
I want to see the business side crumble because it has taken so much out of the sport and been so merciless in gobbling up/casting away little fish – teams, circuits, drivers, sponsors, broadcasters etc.
Equally, as a race fan, I want to see healthy formulae producing healthy grids, pretty cars and interesting racing.
Formula One is simply irrelevant now. It’s more than just sound, tyre width, accessibility etc. it has no raison d’être (with the possible exception of making money, although there are probably more direct and effective ways even of doing that).
It does not produce the fastest, most technically advanced, purest, racing machines on the planet. It does not necessarily show us who is the fastest driver on the planet. It does not advance safety or pioneering technology in a tangible way for road cars. It does not provide good, exciting, close racing. Granted, there may be good reasons as to how this situation occurred, but I think it needs to choose its purpose and pursue it relentlessly, without compromise, then to see whether that philosophy is sustainable and/or interesting.
I do not buy the idea of appealing to new viewers when the existing show isn’t even appealing to die-hard fans. By the same token, interaction with other media during races does little to change the fundamental need for something interesting to interact about – something more than betting how many cars will make it to the grid or how long Mercedes, Renault and Honda executives can justify the effort involved.
“The post-Melbourne stories have focused on how F1 can be fixed. This, of course, assumes that it is broken, which is an interesting discussion.”
The actual “show” was certainly broken – 13 cars on track just isn’t enough to produce an interesting race.
In that respect it was the worst grand prix since the Indy fiasco, the support races provided more interesting racing than the pinnacle of motorsport.
It was of course a series of very exceptional/unusual circumstances that led to 13 runners – we can only hope something a little more exciting happens if they have 16-18 in Malaysia
On the other hand its very conceivable that a few teams could fold in a hurry and we’d have the same scenario again.
As a result F1 certainly didn’t win over any new fans- most people thought it was a bit of a laughing stock. (eg: All of Van Der Garde’s action for what? – to try to race in a non-event)
I heard several quotes along the lines of “I wouldn’t cross the street to watch them” from big motor sport fans.
And that is a double whammy given the move to pay TV – people will pay if the show is good enough.
But if the show is rubbish its a convenient point in time to just switch it off and forget about it instead of switching to pay tv.
Every race is interesting, you just need to be shown the right things. If you were not it is the fault of the TV
Every race is interesting, just not as interesting as a lot of other things. The new and younger audiences any form of entertainment needs to attract don’t give their attention easily anymore. There are other sports and other forms of entertainment that F1 now has to compete against that are far more interesting, engaging and rewarding to follow as a fan. F1 somehow needs to do a far better job.
I’ve been following F1 since the late 80’s and Melbourne this year was the first GP apart from Silverstone that I’ve been to in person.
The event was great, the race itself was poor. There were some interesting things there going on, but after some of the great racing last season, last years season opener at Melbourne was fabulous, for example, it felt a bit flat. I was left wondering how long Jenson could keep Perez behind him, and why his car sounded so bad. Wondering what might have been if we hadn’t lost 2 cars on the recon laps, wondering when Mercedes turned the power down to conserve their allocated engine supply. If you’re listening to local commentary while walking around the circuit, with the occasional few minutes of big screen watching. chatting to some of the other punters as you do so , it gets a little harder to following the subtleties of the race.
The basic problem was a lack of cars running. I don’t buy into the “everything is boring as only 1 of 2 cars can win a race” – last season there was great racing amongst the chasing pack, and this year promises plenty more of the same. RB/Ferrari/Williams are all closely matched, despite the naysayers I reckon McLaren will be right up amongst them by mid season and Lotus don’t look too shabby either. The fight for 3rd with that pedigree of drivers and 3 or 4 teams really closely matched together is going to throw up some great stuff this year. Who cares if they are fighting for 3rd or 1st as long as they are fighting. Throw in the odd DNF for a Mercedes and the inter team rivalry between Lewis and Nico and this could be a great seasons racing.
Though there’s still not enough cars running, and instead of sitting down and working out how to get more teams on the grid, Bernie is fiddling with pay websites and a lack of internet coverage and supporting RedBulls latest whine about how unfair it all is.
I understand Horner is doing what he must to help his team, but he’d do better heeding Wolffs advice and getting his head down and working harder I think. that approach appears to be starting to payoff for Ferrari.
Instead of tinkering with things Bernie needs to embrace social media and online video streaming and give potential new fans quality free, short, highlight videos they can watch on their phones/tablets etc. and a product they can buy for £10/weekend or £100 a season that lets them stream a GP weekend.
Hell build a decent website and put a bunch of premium content behind a paywall if you have to, but screwing every last penny you can out of every last punter only serves to increase short term gain at the expense of long term profit.
If F1 is to have a decent long term future too then small teams must be able to play the game and grow into bigger teams. If it’s not possible to make a profit if you’re a team near the back of the grid, then the sport will wither and die eventually. All that you get is succession of wealthy people who have a go, lose a lot, and give up or go broke. None of which makes for good racing in the log run.
The FIA should cap the cost of customer race engines, the manufacturers aren’t going anywhere, they’re still going to design and build them, lock the cost of the new hybrid power units down so they are comparable in cost to the 2013 engines, mandate that customer engines must be identical to works engines in hardware and software, and more teams will come to the party and perhaps some new teams will emerge.
Where are the next generation of F1 fans coming from? Where are the next generation of F1 teams coming from?
Bernie was a garagista once. Has he forgotten where he came from? Maybe once you reach the wrong side of 80 all you see is short term.
I will give me views as an American. Last year NBC raved about its numbers being up to their highest in something like 10 years, dating to when F1 was only available on SPEED cable network and then the first year of NBC. Okay true. Numbers were up to almost a 400,000 viewers per race average. As this represented a huge increase of close to a 98% increase from the previous year, it sounds amazing. Until you look deeper into the picture. The NFL game telecasts average 17.6M viewers. One game equals more viewers than the entire F1 season. Okay, football is OUR sport, so let’s look at others. Basketball = 1.4M, baseball = 690,000, pro hockey = 500,000. The one pro sport where F1 is winning? Major League Soccer in at less than 100,000 average per telecast. Oh, and that horrible (my opinion, I know) “American” racing, NASCAR? A mere 5.7 MILLION per telecast.
I LOVE F1 and have since I got hooked in 1984 as a 16 year punk. Have watched as many races as I can, but have always missed out a ton of action. The NBC coverage is absolutely dreadful. Not b/c of the personalities, they do an excellent job. But, it is dreadful b/c of missed action. During Sunday’s Aussie GP, there 8 commercial breaks that averaged slightly more than 2 laps of action. In total, 17 of the 56 laps were missed…yup, 30% of the race was missed b/c NBC has to chase the dollar. I understand the need, but missing that much action? Inexcusable. Sadly, as a diehard fan, I would pay for the privilege of viewing…if I could be guaranteed to see 100% of the race.
Like any form of entertainment, if it’s great, you’ll pay for it. F1 as a show right now just isn’t worth paying for. Despite everything from enhanced race coverage to DRS, it still feels dull compared to other sports. Seeing two cars bolt away from the rest of the field and pretty much knowing that one of two men is going to win just isn’t entertaining. However it doesn’t seem fair to penalise Mercedes by artificially slowing them down and yet it seems the only way for the other teams to catch up is to spend more money which I believe they can’t. So what’s the fix?
Completely agree – even the race commentators couldn’t put a positive spin on that dull race.
We want to see a good motor race first, and all other things are secondary or an added bonus
They could try a bit of success ballast for each race win (With a capped limit)- it wouldn’t completely penalise their innovation, they could still dominate with extra weight if they are good enough (Which I suspect they are), but it would be the same for any team able to win a race in a season.
I guess a two tiered system of TV would not pay off enough? One regular broadcast in the clear (or to cable anyway) and an enhanced, premium multi feed content version delivered some other way?
It’s a halfway house, not a destination
then I would chose a dedicated full pay deal a la WRC+
Has the English Premier League not been at the same halfway house for 20 years now? Sky/BT for the live content, Match of the Day for the highlights?
Admittedly the destination may change with the digital world, but does anyone know where that destination is?
There is nothing to pay off.
It’s just greed, shortsighted, narrow minded, unjustifiable greed.
The fact that some people are falling over themselves to endorse it, sign up for it, or tell the rest of us how we’ve been having something for nothing is sick. For some to say that we aren’t real fans unless we start subsidising the lives of the rich and famous more than we already do (and we already do way too much) is sick. I know some people can’t wait to pay for the privlege of an F1 feed simply so it sets them apart from the rest of us as someone special but I’m not buying it. Even if I had enough money to do it, I wouldn’t, seriously you may as well just make direct payments into Bernie’s bank acct from yours.
There is an alarming global trend at the moment that see’s some of the most advantaged in life trying harder than usual to make the rest of us feel like we aren’t doing enough, aren’t paying enough, aren’t good enough. These people quite often locked down a market or industry through being in the right place at the right time, pay minimal tax, do very little but scrape profits of the hard work and promotion of others and are now putting a lot of effort into scapegoating everyone else into subsidising them more. If people are stupid or gullible enough to fall for it I can only say it is a sad indictment on how pathetically compliant we have become. I’ve seen it with the mining industry in my home country but understand it to be a microcosm of a greater global grab.
Here in the US they’re trying to resuscitate boxing – which has gone from a pervasive presence 30 years ago to dead by way of pay-per-view. Some people made a lot of money; but I think the sport will remain dead.
Yeah but can you say the same for MMA?
In 30 years Bernie will be 114 and, possibly, past caring.
Why does everyone think going back to the future will solve the issue? It’s not the racing that is at issue, it’s the access, the coverage and the promotion, the past is part of the grand prix legacy, the current and the future just need to ensure the legacy is left intact.
I flew to Melbourne from Perth to attend the GP with my wife. I only went to quali as I’ve been to F1 races in Adelaide, Singapore and to Melbourne previously and I just don’t see the value in paying the prices F1 promoters want (ie probably have to charge to make some of the enormous hosting fees back) for race day grand stand tickets. Still I like to absorb some of the atmosphere so I was hoping qualifying would be a good compromise.
This was the first time I’d heard the new generation of cars as my last GP was Singapore in 2012. And like you Joe given the quality of racing last year I wasn’t concerned about the loss of the noise. However I’ve come away in a different frame of mind. I’ve come to realise that for me part of the drama of F1 was the noise the cars used to make. I remember growing up as a kid in Adelaide and being able to clearly hear the cars as they circulated from my home about 7kms from the CBD. It was electric. So whilst I love the technology of the new cars, I surprisingly find myself mourning the loss of the drama that the cars used to have. They are surprisingly quiet now. The V8s and the Porsche GT3s were more “exciting”.
Come race day and I was very very happy that I hadn’t forked out for race day seats as the action was poor, even by F1 standards. I grew up through the domination of the McLaren-Hondas in the late 80s so I’ve seen domination before, but the prospect of having Mercedes’ advantage baked into the engines for another year and possibly beyond because of the token system is pretty dire from an objective F1’s fan. Especially given Hamilton’s slight edge in speed over Rosberg. There’s very little chance of a real title fight barring mechanical problems for Hamilton. Rosberg just doesn’t have that last 1%.
Likewise Ferrari who were best of the rest were over 30s behind Mercedes so I don’t see them mounting a meaningful challenge. The current engine regulations must be relaxed to allow as much development as required to allow the non-Mercedes manufacturers to get back in the same ballpark. The claim that the engine regulations are saving teams money is a case of the emperor having no clothes. Mercedes spent a record last year to win the championship. How then are the regulations saving people money?
Finally the move to Pay TV here in Australia for all qualification and half of the races will mean that for the first time in 30 years I’m going to be miss a race when Malaysia rolls around as I refuse to pay $600/year simply to watch F1. As a fan I feel totally dispossessed by the greed of the sport. The success of the sport is partially due to people like me having watched it dedicatedly for so many years. Ecclestone has been able to negotiate the massive deals he has primarily off the back of viewership numbers. However, not happy with that he wants to squeeze both ends of the equation. I refuse to be part of that equation.
I probably sound like a very frustrated and bitter old F1 fan. Probably because I am.
Joe, I read most of your posts and its been a great insight into the on and off track ‘mechanics’ of F1. Thank you. The clear theme that continues to present itself is the opinion that CVC et al are hellbent on ripping every last dollar from the sport in anyway possible – and at the moment there are massive issues facing F1 which both fans and teams are having to contend with (as all the prev comments – and your postings – here attest to). My question is this: – do you think Bernie and other persons with the power to influence decisions and direction – in a time critical way – (and despite what may be communicated to the media) are at the minute aware of the size of the frustration the fans have with the horrendous state of the sport (and are made aware of forums like this), and behind closed doors ever have roundtables where they say ‘oh boy, we really need to address this’ ??
I attended the Melb race and aside from the thrill of seeing an F1 car zip past you in ‘real life’ rather than on tv, that was the only excitement the actual race had – the support races were the true races.
The support races were great weren’t they. It’s a good demonstration of how out of touch we’ve become. We are here talking about F1, what’s wrong etc and completely ignoring the amount of great racing on offer from the other classes/categories at the same track on the same weekend.
I have followed F1 since 1979, when Australian telecasts started. I now live in a country where there is no domestic or pay TV feed. I could afford pay TV, but I won’t do that if the only thing I want to watch is F1. I will continue to stream free F1 sites and watch when I can.
I was disgruntled to discover this year that the ESPN timing feed cannot give live timing any more – Thanks Bernie – you suck. And thanks again Bernie for turning F1.com to a paid site.
You know Bernie in not so many years I will be one of those retired guys that might buy a designer watch or other luxury goods. But if you continue to take access away from fans I will walk away. F1 is not that important.
There is a very simple answer to all of the above…Bernie quite simply has to go. He (it) epitomizes the phrase, How much is enough…
Getting pay tv (foxtel) hooked up on Monday here in Aus.Network 10 coverage of the Melbourne GP was rubbish compared to what Sky offer and as mentioned in other posts we are to get the bbc/sky model for the rest of the season.I have been saying for years that if ever F1 went to pay tv i would get it.So now,my hand has been forced and I’m very much looking forward to seeing all the practice, qualifying,pre and post race all in hd.Good bye network 10.The home of motorsport?They’re kidding me right?
By the way i was at the Aus gp all 3 days and thoroughly enjoyed it. Yes,the field was somewhat depleted but there was still enough going on to keep me interested on the track and in the courts.
We need to be concerned about Silverstone, this year could be the last.
It appears that the moves and manoeuvrings that have placed Patrick Allen in charge and brought us a new hopeful outlook, have also left former contractors/partners unhappy with their lot and/or treatment and they are threatening a supposed £4m court action.
With Silverstone on a perpetual financial knife edge and seemingly in a continual re-configuration, their current bravado towards their detractors seems a little cocky if not foolish. However things are rarely as they seem in the world of F1, thus I hope Joe will be able to clarify.
I am sure that whatever action was taken was taken for a reason.
Good article Joe.
But I don t agree that every race is interesting, even if you are shown the right things. Some are just plain dull and processional. Some are real crackers.
The thought of paying Murdoch to watch makes me sick. I would rather not watch. I have watched F1 and Aussie V8s for decades, but I will give up on racing if it involves paying Foxtel.
I had Foxtel but after the Murdoch newspaper phone tapping I refuse to have it. You have to draw the line somewhere…
Thank you for another great post Joe.
I’ve posted about pay to view in previous comments section. In those comments I’ve talked about the free to air model and explained that it’s not free, that we all pay for it somehow. In general, when people say it is inevitable or natural that we should pay to see the sport I think it misrepresents the economic realities around the broadcast rights, sponsorship, advertising expenses and deductions. That’s not a criticism of Joe or his comments above, rather a statement of the actual as opposed to the perceived. I will try to not cover the same ground again, except to say that we do not owe F1, it’s financial controllers, team owners, or governing body any money or privilege.
The only thing free in F1 is the audience, our time, commitment and money.
You and I.
Us.
The overwhelming majority of us make no money, enjoy no custom, and draw no income from the sport we support. We do not profit from the support we provide, for the hours we devote to watching, discussing, promoting. In my country that often means late nights alone while the family sleeps, a tired early start to a working day/week. In the northern hemisphere it means a sizeable chunk of healthy weekend outdoor time lost to chair or couch in front of a screen. We relearn rules and vast amounts of technical info every couple of seasons, putting up with petulant sideshow dramas from the promoter and team owners, losing historical racetracks in iconic locations and continually reinventing enthusiasm for an increasing number of characterless and hollow stadium circuits.
The viewing figures that Bernie wields dictate the income that the sport, CVC, and team owners receive. The viewing figures dictate the corporate interest, investment and support that Bernie and the teams rely upon. The viewing figures are entirely reliant upon you and I.
We ARE the asset base of F1.
As teams come and go, as the majority have done, we have remained.
When Bernie wheels and deals we are the widgets he is wheeling and dealing with, we are the assets he rents out.
Quite simply, it is the audience, the committed audience that provides the financial foundation, income, and lifeblood of F1.
That holds true before we even start discussing the dollars we give that keep others and their industries afloat. Merch, media, etc.
The expectation that we should now pay for the privilege of making Bernie and others rich is perverse. As I’ve said before, the gap between Red Bull and Manor will be no better with pay tv subscription income, the distribution of revenue no fairer, the racing no closer. The sport won’t be improved, if anything it will be diminished. I’m not going to pay to support that, I won’t be further compliant in the downfall of something I’ve loved.
Adam,
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Spot on.
Engine tokens, only 4 engines per year, no testing etc, they would be the rules dreamed up by the anti racing brigade not the clueless people that run the sport. We were told it needed to change if not f1 would go bankrupt. Well now we have ultra expensive engines, dull sounding cars, fuel flow limits, historic venues not wanting to host a go as its too expensive, teams on the verge of folding as costs are immense and you say its F1 is ok, Joe, you need to see the show from our perspective
If i wasn’t subscribing to Sky for the football which includes the F1 i wouldn’t pay for it. I might occasionally watch the highlights on the BBC and the live ones when they have them.
Theoretically speaking, and who knows if possible, do you think if Red Bull bought out CVC it would work well?
Most of the previous comments insisted on TV, but may I suggest this off the point?
Young people don’t watch TV so much, instead they rely on their cellphones or tablets to link them to the world. It so happens that formula1 has been selling an app for the last so many years. At first it was mainly the same leaderboard that press and officials have, with sector, colored times ( yellow, white, green and purple) indicating gaps tyre fatigue and so on.
I actually found it more attractive than the lousily commented TV coverage (in fact, I found myself in front of the TV and not looking at its screen but at my tablet.
Alas, this year the app is trying to look pretty, and is almost useless. But providing that kind of tools to youngsters could be a good approach.
I thinking turning F1.com into a paid subscription service could be an excellent idea. Just look at Hulu, Netflix of HBOGO. It’s the way younger generations want to consume their media.
I’d happily pay a subscription fee and pay even more to watch races from th archive.
F1 may not be “broken”, but it sure appears to be. The “TV issue” is just one aspect that is becoming more broken by the year. I have removed my bookmark for F1.com. I used to have a low-level subscription to Autosport.com, paying something like $6 US per month. But I’ve dropped it since they’ve increased the price 3-fold. I use my free views then don’t look until the next month. Being in the US, I pay for cable ($200 a month for Comcast cable and internet), which gives me F1 for no extra charge. If I have to pay more to get F1, I won’t.
So what’s good about F1. Less every year. I could whine about individual issues, but that will do no good at all. I have a very hard time getting new people interested in F1. There is too much money and technology in it for it to be “relevant” to the common man in the street.
I get my F1 fix, for now, by paying for cable; subscribing to GP+ (which is the best thing to happen for promoting F1 as it is); reading this blog (which is the thing to happen for presenting reasonable fixes to F1 and if there were lap charts I wouldn’t even buy Autocourse); and by talking and typing to a small circle of like-minded friends.
How to “fix” F1 is simple: get rid of Bernie and put Joe Saward in charge of the commercial end of F1.
>>The sport needs to understand how to make its fans feel loved, which assuredly it does not do at the moment.<<
Before that, it needs to learn to give a flying **** about whether the fans feel loved or even welcome. If anyone out there's preserved ancient Motoring News editions, you can check the one in 1978 reporting on the Indy Cars' race at Silverstone. I think I can closely paraphrase the reporter therein who, pointing up the contrast to the hospitable Americans, wrote 'Formula One drivers and teams generally treat the fans with arrogant disdain.' I haven't been near a paddock since the '80s so I don't know if it's that bad today. It looks to me like things've gotten a little better now in some ways; for example, the current by-the-fence autograph sessions I see on video were unthinkable back then.
How can I tell the powers that be that all races on pay TV is not an option in the UK, when what that means in reality is a huge payment to Sky for a load of stuff that I will never want to watch just to be able to watch Formula 1? I cope at the moment by buying vouchers from NOW TV, reluctantly, when a race isn’t on terrestrial TV, but I suspect that Sky would stop NOW TV once it had all the races i.e. a monopoly on F1.
I would just stop watching F1, much as I’d hate to. I’ve already stopped watching the only other sport I love, cricket. I would reconsider if it were possible to subscribe a reasonable amount to be able to watch just F1 and cricket but, while Sky operate a system which makes a subscription for an “entertainment” package compulsory, I won’t.
I doubt if I’m that unusual. I just hope that F1 wakes up before it’s too late.
Joe said: “Pay-TV is probably inevitable given the economics of the sports industry,….”
No not at all. Sponsors want ‘eyeballs’. The more exclusive and inaccessible you make F1 the less ‘high street’ brands will see it as reaching their market. Reach is the key word even for luxury brands, along with making it aspirational. Without a healthy number of outside sponsors, teams are relying on FOM money. So who is in almost complete control of the whole show? Yes…Bernie/FOM. Think NASCAR where there at least there is an appearance of financial balance between all parties.
Joe said: “What is also required with pay-TV is an active and integrated social media programme to attract new viewers,….”
Not much use if they are unable to view on TV, what is being pushed as an exciting and interesting sport. Of course in an age of sophisticated technology, very few if any ‘fans’ are going to see the tech side of the sport. So what is social media going to convey? Celebrity twitter garbage? Seb has a new haircut, wow yawn! Anyway shock horror, social media is not growing, and in some areas it is in decline. Ogilvy agency published a paper showing that brand reach on Facebook, had dropped by 1/2 from 13% to 6% in just nine months. Both Ogilvy and Facebook sources(earnings call) are looking at zero reach by year end. Twitter is facing the same drop. But Instagram and Snapchat have doubled their active user base in the last year. If you believe the 2014 Princeton Uni paper about social media, Facebook will loose 80% of its’ users by 2017. There is also a clear trend for younger people away from Facebook and Twitter. So I would ask, what use is Social media for FOM. Nothing much, Bernie was correct in saying that he can’t monetize it. Social media is free, and if they use it to drive people to the F1.com site, disappointment will increase when people find it is all behind a pay wall. Sites like this one, should be supported by FOM, and given access to audio and video material, because they are the only ones doing any real promotion for the sport.
Great comments re social media Iain. To be frank, I think most of us over 30 are so far behind with social media we should be careful about the assumptions we make. I and many of my friends are on FB, but increasingly aware it has largely become the domain of older people. It’s pretty guaranteed that once people my age start using an app or tool it is doomed for younger generations – which is probably exactly as things should be.
Your comment re FOM supporting sites such as Joe is spot on as well. Joe does a great job promoting the sport, an amazing job really, especially given the no holds barred nature of his writing. The sport should have assets and resources that are directed to sites such as this to help promote it further. This could all happen without writers such as Joe being co opted by FOM.
The restrictions need to be loosened up. Teams have to be given the chance to come up with innovative ideas. Otherwise, a start-up is unlikely to be able to compete (legally within the restrictions) with the likes of Ferrari or Mercedes. The cost of a milli-second is too high when the boundaries to innovate are so small. This is also a reason why driver salaries are in my opinion so elevated. How much did the likes of Fangio and Moss earn in their day? Drivers should be enticed to race for the world champion price, not their salary.
Ticket prices must be realigned to allow ordinary young and middle aged consumers to attend events, which will entice sponsors to invest more. The glamour factor does not have to be swept away, this could remain in the paddock / screens.
I fully agree that the distribution of revenues between teams needs to be fair. Sport should be fair.
Observer, regarding your comment about driver salaries, I’m personally very sad indeed that the current F1 World Champion can’t even be bothered to race for the pride of having #1 on the nose of his race car…..says it all about modern F1 really.
People will pay for anything if they think its worth it but F1 is increasingly less worth it in my personal opinion.
“kcrossle” says PPV boxing is dead – it may be as a sport, but one off premium events such as Pacquiao Mayweather will be massive in terms of PPV. Trouble is F1 doesn’t delivery anything like that – maybe once in a while – a last race of the season where the championship is at stake between two drivers from rival teams? Maybe a pay per season pass would work, but given that this season is already looking particularly dire in terms of being exciting I wouldn’t pay unless it was cheap.
Joe says “every race is interesting”. They may be to some (or maybe Joe since he’s at them all). But for us mortals, sat on our sofas for the vast majority of them, interesting doesn’t really cut it in terms of sport. Snooker is interesting. Yes, very interesting safety shot you played in Frame 62, Steve. Great. Yawn!
There may be the odd exciting incident in a race, but overall its looking very boring these days. Its “interesting” that Mercedes are 66-1 to win the Championship with William Hill – however that’s 66-1 ON ffs!!! The shortest price non Mercedes driver is Vettel at 20-1 against!. That doesn’t look exciting.
Although I’ve followed F1 for 40 years now, subscribe to GP+, have attended some GPs and have Sky (so I spend some income on F1). However, my interest wanes significantly at times – typically when some teams/drivers are very dominant and I’m rapidly losing interest again now and suspect I’m not the only one.
Frankly, I’m sick of the idiots running the sport and ruining it as a spectacle and ruining it as a competitive event.
I am prepared to put up with how pathetic the engines sound now. I am prepared to listed to the irrelevant rubbish about F1 being “green”. In fact, I only really want 2 things 1) plenty of closely matched teams, 2) close exciting racing. Fat chance right now or any time soon I fear. No wonder I find myself taking more of an interest in GP2 and MotoGP … and Darts.
I think saying F1 is anywhere near Green is rubbish. It is better than it has been at times in the past – remember throwaway quali engines. However I don’t think F1 aspiring to have Green credentials is rubbish, and I don’t see any conflict between wanting to go motor racing and being Green. That is unless we believe that Formula 1 is based on waste. I would think the pinnacle of motor racing technology should based on being non wasteful. I’ve never understood clinging to the idea that inefficient is good or faster, I don’t know if the laws of physics support the idea that inefficient systems are the fastest or best. Someone might be able to legimately pull me up on that of course, I’m not a physicist.
I turned off pay tv a few years ago. I can here in Calif. watch F-1 live on the local Spanish channel ad free. There’s ton ads before and after. I don’t speak Spanish but it’s free.
I can watch Le Mans live streaming in English on the Le Mans site, on the Audi site in English, or on Speed. There are on line streaming sites coming on line one is TORQUE TV it’s not caring F-1 of course but it’s racing. F-1 is way behind the curve sadly but with statements from Bernie how he only wants those that can afford a fancy watch, well there not much hope at this time.
I just found out I can watch Sebring live also on line, live streaming.
That’s because no-one wants to pay to televise it.
They also show it live on Fox Sports pay channel and that’s the feed I see on line. Just saying.
If there was a package I could buy that allowed me to watch the races live, and nothing else, I’d love it. The whole experience of being sold a box of turds with a few gems is hardly acceptable for free-to-air channels, let alone pay TV. I suppose, however, that would be economically unviable.
There are enough stories to be told in and about F1, they just need to be told effectively. On TV, the BBC did a solid job of that around the end of the previous decade, when they still showed all the races and made a good effort to make all the intricacies accessible and understandable. But it needn’t necessarily be on TV, other channels can be involved, or even be the main outlets. Plus of course the well-banged drum (around here anyway) of getting the name, the idea, of F1 out there, in games, on non-racing TV shows or web sites and so on.
Adrian Newey’s idea of tokens for aero development sounds intriguing: restrictions usually promote creativity and it might indeed limit spending. However, the use of advanced aerodynamics also makes close racing more difficult. Maybe teams should be obliged to develop aerodynamics that remain stable when another car is close (if that’s even possible). Now there’s a challenge, Adrian.
Ideally, F1 would need new owners with more respect for the sport and the spectacle. It also needs a governing body that deigns to govern and show everywhere the concern and professionalism they have when safety and investigations of accidents is concerned.
Being an Aussie, I was and am delighted that F1 is on pay now. I think I may have said it here before that the coverage we have been promised over the years has fallen way short of what fans wanted.
As for the F1.com site. It’s just silly. Over time they have removed content or made it so you have to pay to use things like weather and speed info on the laptime ticker. And it’s not what it once was where you saw split times for each sector that made it a far more valuable tool.
If there was an alternative out there (I’m sure there is but I’ve not looked yet) I would use that instead of the official site and wheres the point in that?
F1.com is so maddening – instead of investing in improvements they’ve actually spent money to take features away. Madness!
Being an aussie, I’ve always been delighted with the Australian coverage. At times have preferred it to Brundle esp when he used to appear to be so anti European, thankfully not an issue these days. I don’t know what the pay coverage is like but it wuuld have to be pretty amazing to justify the asking price… nah, it couldn’t be that amazing actually. Would have loved every GP to be covered as well as the Australian GP, but I never blamed our local coverage for that, although I agree ti is their fault they didn’t give us practice if the feed was available to them.
If you can’t, or won’t, pay the monthly price of Sky Sports (which really isn’t a lot of money, especially if you describe yourself as “a diehard fan”) then I would hazard a guess that you are not the kind of fan that Bernie, CVC and co want. If you will only watch for free, what do you really give them in return for their “product”? Why should they let you watch for free? Will you be buying a Rolex or another of the high-priced goods that they advertise?
Reading the above may make you angry, but I would bet that this is how they think, and what they think of you. F1 is arguably not intended for the “ordinary” fan anymore – you are not excluded if you really want to watch, but you will not be catered to/made to feel welcome either.
This is an interesting piece of positioning/marketing and only time will tell what the ultimate effects will be. The reality is that F1 has always been a niche sport, although one that has been able to generate broader interest in the general population from time to time. In that context, the move to pay tv is not a surprise – a massive tv audience that won’t pay to watch is of no use to those in charge. The counter argument is that the free-to-air audience is essential to acquire the next generation of fans, but will they be the right kind of fans?
“Why should they let you watch for free? Will you be buying a Rolex or another of the high-priced goods that they advertise?”
Thats true … but when locked away on PPV and only attracting those already invested in F1 … You doom yourself to an ever dwindling audience.
A good example is Golf .. in the poular 1980s heyday of BBC coverage for most events and the Ryder cup .. golf boomed .. new courses built up and down the UK.
Now golf has been locked away since the 90s..the numbers of players is less and courses are struggling… and no newblood is watching the beeb for free and deciding they would like to try it.
You only need look at sports in the Olympics and how the have a flourish of new blood every 4 years.
Nobody signs up for F1 PPV unless already interested in F1… and no terrestrial coverage will kill off interest in those who do not know they have it yet.
You are wrong James Evinstone about F1 having always been a niche sport. That is not the case, Grand Prix racing used to be a part of a global sports network, which amongst other things saw the Indy 500 as the largest one day sports event in the world, and even the RAC Rally, as was, pulling 6 million or so ordinary folk as well as dedicated fans, out of their houses to watch an awesome spectacle in the UK, every single year.
Bernie,CVC & the FIA have conspired to destroy all of the above, and create a financial monster instead, that only benefits them alone.
If F1 goes strictly to Pay-per-view only ( which is where we are almost these days) as here in USA NBCsports is only on pricey cable svcs. TV viewership will drop by the millions…. & after 35+ years of committed devotion and watching … ill stop bothering… the jackwads in charge have almost completely destroyed the sport slowly….There are lots of things to chose from to spend my time on & all the good parts of races are posted by some one on youtube eventually…. The changes to F1.com this past month are ridiculous. I’ve deleted the app from my phone & wont bother with that website any more at all….. Screw these greedy bastards.
Joe I don’t always agree with everything you say, but you really nailed this one perfectly. Great post on every point.
There needs to be a model for F1 TV which recognises that there are only 20 events per year and allows customers to buy accordingly. Football is incomparable as you pay for hundreds of games per season and could, if you wanted, watch a game virtually every night of the year when you include international games. A high definition stream directly from the FOM through their own website which cost, say, £ 15 per race would allow fans the flexibility to choose to watch all or as many races as they wanted without committing to buya load of other sport that is of limited interest. Of course this will never happen as it cuts out the broadcast middleman and removes the need for them to hand over their mmultiple millions per year… As a longterm F1 fan who cannot afford Sky I feel extremely short changed by the fact that, having watched virtually every race since the early 90’s, I am now reduced to either waiting for highlights 50% of the time or forking over £50 a month to Sky. I am self-aware enough to know that, during the ‘free to air’ era I did respond to sponsorship and advertising and have made many purchase decisions based upon which companies are involved in the sport so it does work, but it’s clear that this model is not what the powers that be want anymore. It’s money up front or nothing and not everyone had got that much cash to spare…
I love the way with a stroke of a pen, or click of a keyboard, people write, “Reduce the engine costs!”
To achieve this someone will have to dig really deep into their pockets, because the real costs of design, development, tooling and manufacture are fixed and dont go away. To expense that across the current number of units that a two car team require is mind blowing.There are no longer unlimited testing days that eat up high milage motors, every Km is counted for the four, count them, four race engines that each car can use. As an example, Alonso is now down to three motors for his season, thanks Mags!
So is the proposal that the engine manufactures sell/lease the product at a loss?
Because if it is there soon wont be any manufactures! The financial departments of race teams dont exist for the benifit of customer teams to buy the use of four motors at say 50% of the current costs.
What do you think Mercedes spent to achieve the level of performance and reliability they have achieved? Do you think the design departments of the engine suppliers grow on trees and so they can be hired and fired at will?
This is yet again the legacy that the CVC problem is leaving for those that follow.
So, in summary we have the most expensive motors in the history of F1, we have a single manufacture that is currently able to produce quick and reliable motors, we have non Mercedes teams wanting to have parity and cost control,and then we have fans that they will be required to pay hugh amounts to watch none racing, either on pay TV or at a track. And you wonder why there is no German GP this year. There has been no French GP for many years and I suspect the British GP is hanging on by its fingernails.
The whole F1 world is holding its breathe for a single heartbeat to stop, and then watch out for the end as we know it. Sorry to be so down, but time it was addressed. And engine costs will be the least of the problems.
I think that Mercedes has a very cost-effective F1 programme and could easily afford to subsidise its customer engines.
Joe – from a financial perspective, the current strategy is arguably creating short term pain, but long term gain. The reason being is that as revenues fall off a cliff, the less the sport is worth to CVC and the more affordable it is for the right owner to come along and buy the sport.
How appropriate that F1 should start the season in Melbourne, home to the tv series, Neighbours, on its 30th anniversary. Personally I never saw the attraction in so called soap operas, that is until now. I always thought that their storylines were too unbelieveable, that they didn’t follow normal conventions like the law, decently, honour, etc. But F1 has converted me.
In episode 1 of ‘F1, the Soapie’ we had the story of a gilted fiancee turning up to the church on the wedding day, in the original wedding dress no less, to see if the cad of her future hustband could be brought to his senses and dump the new flashy tart in favour of her. She even tries to have him hauled before a court. But all is forgotten when a mountain of cash is miraculously handed over. No explanation is given as to how the cash strapped lovebirds found the money. What are the odds that good ol’granddad Bernie has dipped into his meagre life savings to save the youngsters from further distress?
Then there was Sir Dennis who has in denial. He maintains that he is still a force and that things are great despite the bleeding obvious that the world has moved on from him some time ago. Its as if he had a bang to the head and is suffering amnensia, but he’s never going to say that.
There’s another mob in the old manor house who have never been seen. They’ve never left the building except for once when a family photo was taken in the front garden.
Having been a frustrated F1 addict for many a decade I now quite enjoy ‘F1 the soapie’ No longer do I sit through 2 hours of a tiremore procession in the expectation that there is going to be actual racing (whatever that means) and get frustrated. A few passing moves and I used to swoon. Now all I need is a web browser to keep up to date with the latest tripe and I get a virtual holiday to parts of the world I have never heard of, let alone fancy visiting. By the way is there any truth in the rumour that there is going to be a GP in Yemen or Somalia?
I understand that there is an obsence amount of money in tv soapies and its twin brother, reality tv. If we play our parts right, we can make BE and CVC enough to keep his lovely girls in the lifestyle they’d like to become accustomed. Maybe he can get charity status for F1 and save on the tax bill?
Please help, its a worthy cause.
Missed something like 20 GP on TV since they first came to Australian TV around 1979, missed 4 Aus GP live, I live in Urban Sydney but do not and without moving home cannot access pay TV.. just another casualty of the short term targets of the bean counters… do the sponsors care? I believe not but the ignore the fans at their peril… . Will I be watching the Highlights package.. nope
Oh and Joe, they have driven me away to the point I will not be subscribing to your post race publication… had planned to but my motor racing focus is shifting!
FOM needs to get on top of the direct streaming pay-tv. I will grudgingly accept paying for F1 nowadays, but I don’t want to be forced to pay for football, cricket, rugby and sprocket-whispering as well as 300 channels of repeats and z-grade movies simply to be able to watch F1 sessions live.
Joe, the introduction of the new engines and the resultant change of the balance of power from Red Bull to Mercedes along with the seeming lack of credible competition to Mercedes this year means that F1 is in crisis. Having 15 cars on the grid, 2 failing to make the grid due to mechanical maladies (when was the last time that happened?) with 13 cars competing (I use that word advisedly as Button’s McLaren really wasn’t in the same league as the rest) after one lap hardly makes for an interesting race. If that sets the pattern for the remaining races it makes justifying buying pay per view extremely difficult. I watched the Sky telecast and while it provides interesting viewing especially Johnny Herbert’s observations in qualifying, it is geared towards a UK and not a global audience. Frankly there were times during the race when I felt like switching over to the golf!
Don’t worry folks, the Strategy Group is going to fix everything! They are working on rule changes to give fans what they want. (Ha ha ROTFLMAO)
When asked how they knew what fans wanted and what means they had used to consult fans Claire Williams confessed that “they needed to work on that!” In other words only the opinion of the inward looking highly biased members of the F1SG were considered. Those mainly as an excuse to change to more favourable rules for those who did a poorer job than Merc. Or to make up for the total lack of any sign of promotion of F1 from the promoter.
Time this lopsided cartel was abolished, the FIA gave the money and shares back and started enforcing the rules properly. Time the rules went back to being the Regs and not some hidden secret commercial agenda. Time the teams lagging behind, put their energy into catching up instead of whinging and trying to get the rules changed in their favour.
Not all bad news though, the hugely well sponsored, very exciting, BTCC season starts with a launch tomorrow 24/03/15 at Donnington and the first set of races at Brands on 4/5 of April. (Happily not an FIA event) It’s not F1 but a contrast to show how exciting lower paint-swapping door handle nudging formulae can be.
Well said Joe…. for me Australia GP had too much tarmac and not enough cars. Lack of action will drive views away faster than anything else…
should of said “viewers” (what a mean is casual F1 viewers rather than the hardened seasoned F1 fans)
Joe, I had another thought – this one is interesting. What if the rulebook did away with all of the design boxes and restrictions on Aerodynamics, and instead specified only the following:
there is only allowed a certain specified total surface area
– above the floor, measured relative to sky – i.e., active surfaces are controlled to have a specified total area, including wings, everything.
– floor surface area – all below the car, measured relative to ground
– side/vertical surface area – measured relative to the wheels on either side.
this might be a little complicated with all the suspension bits, etc, but would free things up considerably and allow at the same time for simple, easily policed rules.
the wing heights and widths would still need to be set, but we could take what is used today, say, and lower that total in every area to 75%. that will cut some downforce and make the drivers work a bit more for their money. OTOH, maybe Adrian should be allowed only 50% of the total surface area to work with…
It’s nice to see the ordinary F1 fan view being presented. Thank you Joe. A great article. I’m a big petrolhead, but there’s no way I’ll shell out even more for access to F1.com…I’m an Angry F1 after Australia.
Joe are the teams at all concerned about going to pay TV only and the possible ramifications that could have on finding sponsors? Less viewers isn’t going to do them any favors.
It’s gone mostly to pay TV here in Australia (I can’t watch this weekends race) and only about 30% of the population actually have pay TV.
My interest in the sport will certainly wane as I can’t watch all the races. Even reading about the sport is becoming harder, with the likes of Formula1.com and Autosport going behind pay walls.
It’s not like my sporting interests aren’t catered for either, I’ll just watch more footy and cricket instead (both on free to air).
The obvious solution is for Formula1.com to offer an online streaming service. I’d pay for that and so would many others. Plenty of big US sports do this (NBA and NASCAR).