TiVo : F1 Channel

[marlot]

Originally Posted by richard1960

Its Skys channel to sell and they would have stipulated to VM how it should be re-sold,it would have had little to do with VM i am sure if they could have they would have.

Perhaps VM were lousy negotiators?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by marlot

Perhaps VM were lousy negotiators?

l would have to disagree with your assumption as you have to remember it takes two sides to come to a reasonable conclusion in negotiatians.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by marlot

Perhaps VM were lousy negotiators?

No. It's a business decision on Sky's part, to get one up on VM, and win customers over. It's as simple as that!!

[andy_m]

Originally Posted by marlot

Perhaps VM were lousy negotiators?

Perhaps they didn't have a great deal of leverage. Sky's channel, Sky's investment, Sky's to do what it likes with. I'm amazed it came to cable at all-and don't forget, if you don't have the hd pack on Sky, something which doesn't exist on Virgin, you still have to subscribe to the sports package to watch it in sd-we get that channel on essentially the same terms.

[alwaysabear]

Originally Posted by andy_m

Perhaps they didn't have a great deal of leverage. Sky's channel, Sky's investment, Sky's to do what it likes with. I'm amazed it came to cable at all-and don't forget, if you don't have the hd pack on Sky, something which doesn't exist on Virgin, you still have to subscribe to the sports package to watch it in sd-we get that channel on essentially the same terms.

I could not agree more VM sold their last bargaining chips away last year. From now on its going to be a case of going cap in hand when ever Sky launch a new channel and saying "Please sir can I have some more"

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by alwaysabear

I could not agree more VM sold their last bargaining chips away last year. From now on its going to be a case of going cap in hand when ever Sky launch a new channel and saying "Please sir can I have some more"

Apparently due to OFCOM Sky have to let them have the channels. But they don't have to let them have the HD version, and I don't know what the limit is on what they can charge.

I'm sure there are other people who know far more about it on CF.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Apparently due to OFCOM Sky have to let them have the channels. But they don't have to let them have the HD version, and I don't know what the limit is on what they can charge.

I'm sure there are other people who know far more about it on CF.

That's wrong , this only applies to Sky Sports 1/HD1 and Sky Sports 2/HD2

Originally Posted by muppetman11

That's wrong , this only applies to Sky Sports 1/HD1 and Sky Sports 2/HD2

And even then after a mammoth 3 year pay TV review by OFCOM.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

That's wrong , this only applies to Sky Sports 1/HD1 and Sky Sports 2/HD2

Thanks for that. I was only going fron snippets that I had read on CF.

Do you mean that Sky charge VM what they want, and choose exactly what they sell to them?

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Thanks for that. I was only going fron snippets that I had read on CF.

Do you mean that Sky charge VM what they want, and choose exactly what they sell to them?

I suppose it's down to the pair to agree carriage terms of any new Sky channels.

[denphone]

Bernie Ecclestone suggests free-to-air Formula One could end on BBC.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012...a-one-free-bbc

Bernie Ecclestone has signalled that Formula One could drop its free‑to‑air television coverage on the BBC since the exposure it gets through the pay‑per‑view broadcaster Sky is sufficient on its own. It follows the announcement on Thursday that the rights to broadcast live F1 races in Italy have been sold to Sky Italia in a deal which further reduces the sport's free-to-air coverage.


This year, for the first time in the modern history of F1, not all races are being broadcast in full on free-to-air TV in the UK. At an estimated cost of £25m annually Sky is broadcasting all races, qualifying and practice sessions live while the BBC is paying around £15m to show half of the races live with delayed highlights of the others. "We will never move all countries to pay‑per‑view only though it wouldn't make any difference here in the UK," said Ecclestone.

He explained that of the 25m households in the UK, "Sky reaches over 10m. We don't get 10m on the BBC, normally about 6m or 7m."

Fans were incensed by the new deal since it costs around £480 every year to subscribe to Sky's sports package. Splitting the coverage has already dented the BBC's viewing figures and this could push the F1 rights exclusively into Sky's hands when the current joint contract expires in 2018.

[marlot]

"The Chinese Grand Prix in April was the first race broadcast live by the BBC this year and its viewing figures were down by 1m on 2011 to a peak of 4.21m. Sky's coverage of the race peaked at 887,000 and averaged at around 1m over the first four races of the year."

So I make that 80% of the population who can't/aren't watching the races on sky.

Bernie is a master at spin - all this 'it wouldn't make any difference here in the UK' is clearly bull.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by marlot

"The Chinese Grand Prix in April was the first race broadcast live by the BBC this year and its viewing figures were down by 1m on 2011 to a peak of 4.21m. Sky's coverage of the race peaked at 887,000 and averaged at around 1m over the first four races of the year."

So I make that 80% of the population who can't/aren't watching the races on sky.

Bernie is a master at spin - all this 'it wouldn't make any difference here in the UK' is clearly bull.

And when you consider that with 6 winners in 6 races, the races are far more exciting now. So you would expect viewing figures to go up.

[andy_m]

I keep re-reading that piece, and I just cannot understand what Bernie's talking about. There are obviously some lines to read between but I'm struggling to do so. He can't seriously think that having a potential audience of 10 million is the same as having an actual audience of 6, can he? Especially when there is very obviously a large cross over of people who are watching the BBC coverage on the Sky platform. The simple fact is that the wishes of the sponsors will always win out, which is precisely why the BBC are continuing to get good access to teams and drivers even at races they're not broadcasting live-more people see them. Until Sky are able to compete in terms of actual viewing figures I am sure that F1 will continue to remain free to air in some form or another and will just be for Sky what it always was-a way to drive subscriptions to theirsports package outside of tthe football season and to assist with migrating customers to their hd stb.

[jb66]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

And when you consider that with 6 winners in 6 races, the races are far more exciting now. So you would expect viewing figures to go up.

I think it's boring, it's not who is the best driver, who takes the risk late breaking, it's all "look after tyres" and luck. The season Hamilton won was my favourite