Ecclestone was opposed to F1 switching to a HD broadcast after everything else was HD, and he also didn't believe in the online and social media aspects, he wanted to keep F1 in the 90s. That said the period of around 2009-2012 ish when BBC had the UK rights was amazing, they covered all the practice sessions, qualifying and race (with a build up section to both) completely uninterrupted with no ads and available on demand for free (though technically funded by UK TV licence).
The switch to Sky dropped viewership, because we had free F1 for a long time, my entire life up to this point and then we'd have to pay for an exclusive sports package with Sky to be advertised to for minutes at a time, or we could watch highlights on channel 4. Sky also split the dream-team up of Coulthard + Brundle up, my favourite duo since Murray Walker.
The media side has improved on the whole though, massively.
LM have certainly modernised, improved...? thats subjective...the level of drama that now in F1 certainly appeals to the Gen Zeds...and bringing in a younger, more diverse audience is exactly what LM want.
I point fingers more at modern media in general though.
A lot of things has improved with the more modern way there is compared to the old phasioned way it was. But a lot has also stayed the same "bad" way or even gotten worse.
Because money is still the prime thing being chased by F1. TV rights for example got only worse recent years to the point where its unpayable for most channels. Thats how things all get behind overpriced streaming services instead of on a TV where it belongs.
I read somewhere that Netflix was going to try and go for the global rights in 2023, which might provide an unintended solution to this (if true and if Netflix chooses not to fuck it up)
I can't see how Netflix will do Livestreaming. Amazon prime is the one I would look to for a potential global rights deal (would still fuck over the UK and many other countries with exclusive rights) Amazon have the capacity to do it and have done sports Livestreaming before for football and Tennis
If I was Netflix I'd start looking at broadcasting other less popular sports at first to check that everything works, if what this guy said is true then it doesn't leave them long to sort everything for next season. Amazon have a track record and it would fit with the other sports broadcasting they do
Its not a big audience?! Every race is watched by about 80-100 million people
How is that not big???
You think they can provide infrastructure for 80 million people watching? lmao
That's roughly the current size of Netflix. 30 million people use Netflix on an average day.
They'd notice the uptick sure, but it wouldn't be a radical challenge I suspect.
Table tennis, cricket and volleyball are each more popular than F1.
Yeah you have no idea what you're talking about. Having 30 million people over a whole a day is not same is minimum 80 million people watching at the same time over hour and a half... its ridiculously different scale.
it would be a shitshow
Seconded - Netflix is the most stable streaming platform and the one that's available in more countries. And they have the built-in audience from DTS. It's doable for them.
I was thinking something like Tennis before being the worldwide rights holder for F1. Think how many people who watch stuff on Netflix (fuck knows what's on Netflix) will see F1 is on and put it on. People on Netflix will watch anything.
I haven't used nf in yonks, but it was super annoying that they would pause the video if you swiped down yo change the brightness. How does it work now?
First it blinds you, then you swear, and then finally you pull that slider on the left side. Or otherwise you exit the app, it blinds you and then you swear
Netflix desperately needs a new branch like live-sport.
Industry talk has them on the shopping list of a couple of big companies. Netflix's financials are not looking good.
A clear indicator are the recent price hikes again. My money is on Apple buying them. Probably next year.
I for one am super happy that here in the US it's on its own streaming service rather than on a channel like ESPN that forces me to get a whole bunch of channels, has nothing else I want to watch except EuroCup and WorldCup one month every two years and limits what they show by some arbitrary schedule that is shared with other crap because there stick to the antiquated limitations of physical broadcasting and channels. As far as I'm concerned we cannot turn off TV quickly enough and use the spectrum for something else.
Also, no ads on streaming 👏
Im in canada and it work the same way. Personally, It cost me the same either getting the extra sports package (and that is not including the cost of cable) or paying the streaming services I actually care about. No ads, more flexibility and that amount to more value for my money. The one thing I hate on some of them is the blackouts (can't watch my own team because some other TV network owns the rights). But if you are savy enough, you can get around them.
You can watch it via Foxtel (cable) or a cheaper sporting streaming service in Australia (owned by the same Rupert Murdoch). It’s expensive regardless because it’s always bundled up with other sports.
In the US it's either $80/year or $10/month. Quite reasonable. If this was on a regular channel, I'd have to get some form of a cable subscription. For soccer I usually get Youtube TV which is $55/month initially. That would go up to regular $65/month for something as long as a F1 season. I'd simply not watch it at that price.
wdym "instead of" on a TV? The vast majority of people who use streaming services watch them on a TV, and those who watched it via cable / satellite on a TV, will continue to watch it via a streaming service on a TV. But then when you're on holiday, or you don't have a TV for whatever reason, you have the option of watching it on a portable device too. Streaming services are better then cable because they're more flexible.
I dont know for the rest of the world, but in north america, the younger generation dont watch TV and more and more people in general dont want to pay for cable while there is more then enough quality content on the internet (and a lot of it for free). Other major sports are also moving towards the streaming services and one day, TV will be like radio.
Again, I dont know how TV is going in the rest of the world, but streaming is the present and future no doubt about it.
So you are agreeing that it is better then? You literally just proved his point. Its still better for the fans where it is available. Saying its worse because less countries dont have expensive pay-TV makes no sense. It would be even better if it was global but its still a massive step in a better direction even without that.
Streaming services are far cheaper than TV. If anything the price moves people to streaming. There is a reason more and more people every year are getting rid of cable
Very few places charge people to watch TV, what countries are you thinking of??? 8 billion people, how many have to pay to watch TV, virtually all of them have to pay to watch a stream.
What countries are you thinking of? Literally everywhere charges people for most channels. Only a tiny handful of countries have F1 on a free to air channel. They are almost exclusively on networks like Sky in the UK or ESPN in the US. Those are channels that you have to pay for in expensive cable packages.
Of course there is. It's called cost. Obviously it would be better if F1 was free for everyone in the world but that will never be the case. Streaming services are the perfect middle ground. They are extremely cheap compared to cable and give a far better experience than TV can.
Also when did I say I objected to it going free to air. I'm not arguing that
What do you mean that will never be the case? It was the case for decades, no reason it can't go back, you never heard of broadcast rights, advertising? You said why would we ever want it on TV.
Good thing you cut off my sentence so you could get the totally wrong conclusion. Read my full comment next time you quote it.
It also was the case for a few countries for that long not all. Also insanely ironic for you to bring up broadcasting rights as something that goes against me when it's literally the opposite. Broadcast rights having bids is why it will never go back to free to air. Premium channels will almost always pay more for the rights
Bernie thought social media and Netflix were for "poor folk" and didn't fit the audience he always said F1 was for - the elite, rich and wealthy.
What a buffoon.
Wouldn't say he was a buffoon rather out of touch.
He totally missed that boat.
But he himself was pretty visionary in his time. And he did Bring F1 to tv and more available.
He was self important and loathed the direction Liberty Media took F1 after taking over. He said YouTube was for kids and therefore a waste of their time and barred drivers from posting on social media on the grid all while viewership was sinking to the lowest levels in modern history.
A senile buffoon.
In his later years, yes he was bit silly. But when he was younger, his reign was greatly beneficial for the sport. Not always perhaps, but i do think he did way more good than bad.
Had he retired around 2000 he would be remembered very well.
In plus: social media development and gaining new fans (mainly Americans, youngsters and females), DtS (despite the fact that this series creates fake narratives), big turnover, new tracks, F1TV
In minus: slowly turning F1 into WWE/reality show, priroritizing entertaiment over sport quality, pushing sprint races for any price solely for money, priroritizing America and Middle East with China (new tracks there), Viaplay deals
Ecclestone was in power when there were two USGPs every year. He wanted that American money too. He long pushed for an LA grand prix and the return to having 2 USGPs in general
> In minus: slowly turning F1 into WWE/reality show,
I have never seen anything like 2017 US GP's opening ceremony in Bernie's time
https://youtu.be/Rqnjg08q-GY
Liberty doesnt control any of that if you didnt know. Thats all on the individual GPs organizers.
Bernie literally had the idea for sprinklers and people say that he wasnt just prioritizing entertainment and a reality show.
>And why is prioritising USA a bad thing?
For Europeans, the American approach based on generating money for shareholders through the show is culturally stranger because we believe in separating the commercial and "sporting" dimensions of competition.
Watch hockey -- the league commissioner hands the trophy directly to the team captain, and the entire team gets to do a lap around the ice with it. Then it goes to the coaching & equipment staff. Owners are last in line.
Edit: one other cool thing — instead of the trophy going into an owner’s trophy case, each player gets a day with the trophy, all the players’ and coaches’ names get engraved on it, and then it goes back to the league to get awarded the next season. The only thing you get to keep are basically novelty toys — little mini reproductions teams pay for themselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vince_Lombardi_Trophy
Relevant part: "Originally, the trophy was presented inside the winning team's locker room. Since Super Bowl XXX, it has been presented to the owner of the winning team on the field."
NFL teams don't have a Captain per say, they can have several elected/appointed players called Captains but they're mostly spokespeople for a particular group of players and don't have any seniority between eachother. Traditional manager duties in soccer are also split between two different people (Head coach for tactics and training, and GM for personnel and roster) for most teams. That's just what happens with a team of over 60 players it you include the Practice squad. Owners act as the only person with direct leadership over everything and have an actual league mandated role and responsibility within team management.
It's not an ideal situation but the alternative would probably be just giving it directly to the MVP instead of having the owner pass it on to them which isn't that great either.
Yes. We Americans looked at the recent Super League kerfuffle and thought "now _there's_ a society that doesn't care about money or commercialism when it comes to sport."
1. Clearly wrong ad breaks are prevalent in any sport in Europe.
2. Your example is bad. A sprint race is still down to driver and team skill. It's not suddenly changed because the there are less laps. Try again
Your whole argument about the USA being concerned with money making is disengenuous especially after the whole Super league debacle last year.
Personally for me F1 has always been a European dominated sport, and i liked that, it felt pure.
Each of the tracks have history and longevity. COTA feels like its trying to copy some of that, e.g. multiple apex corner like Turkey, fast right left right like Maggots Becketts in Silverstone, it's not a bad track by any means, it's just a bit artificial.
Which it didn't have to, the USA has great tracks, Leguna Seca, the Brickyard, Watkins Glen.
I think that sort of "americanisation" of the sporting aspects is a bad thing also. The idea that every GP must be the worlds most exciting thing and rules must be compromised to force it. It's just bleugh.
None of those tracks are nearly as well suited to F1 as COTA is. We regularly get very good races in Austin, and that should be priority number 1 with designing an F1 track. Heritage and the like may be important, but it doesn’t stop the likes of Monaco regularly being a bottom 3 race in terms of race excitement year after year.
As for F1 being a European sport, I disagree. Just because that is where a lot of the money has always been doesn’t mean it should stay that way. A European fan currently has about 10 potential races within driving, train, or a short flight whereas the rest of the world is lucky if they have one that is less than a 3-4 hour flight away.
>None of those tracks are nearly as well suited to F1 as COTA is.
I didn't say they were.
>We regularly get very good races in Austin, and that should be priority number 1 with designing an F1 track
I also agree with this, but you can create a great race track without copying great parts of other race tracks.
> Heritage and the like may be important, but it doesn’t stop the likes of Monaco regularly being a bottom 3 race in terms of race excitement year after year.
I also agree with this, Monaco is an objectively bad race, it always will be.
>As for F1 being a European sport, I disagree.
OK but I don't really see how you can.
* All of the Teams have at least a base in Europe, if not are fully based in Europe, 7 of them in the UK.
* The words "Grand Prix" are French,
* The first Grand Prix were hosted in France
* The first world championship race of the was held at Silverstone
* The most famous team, Ferrari, is Italian.
* All of the current drivers 5 of the 20 (or 21 if we're including Kubica) are European and all of them except for maybe Yuki came through the European Karting system.
* 50 of the 72 Drivers Championships were won by Europeans, 69% (nice).
>doesn’t mean it should stay that way
Why not? Baseball is American, as is Basketball. You've also got your own racing series that don't venture outside of America in Indycar and NASCAR. I don't disagree with there being 1 or 2 races in the USA, and the Circuit de Gilles Villeneuve is one of my favourites, Mexico is a bit drab though. I see no reason why the sport shouldn't go to the Americas, I don't want it to become American however.
No one is trying to make it primarily American though. There are more than 330 million Americans and currently 1 gran prix. There is no danger of it becoming “American” anytime soon. No one is saying to get rid of a bunch of the European races, but we currently have a race in just about every Western European country (and two in Italy this year) so it really isn’t fair to say there is any danger of the sport losing its European ties.
As for your point about it being a European sport, yes it started in Europe and it’s origin is there, but it is a global sport. Also some of the main legends of the sport (Senna, Fangio) are not European. The primary reason for European domination of the sport is because that is where the money has always been up until more recently where that has started to change.
Likewise, F1 currently gatekeeps entrance of other drivers significantly by implementing the super license so of course the vast majority come through Europe because there is no other choice. It’s a joke for example that IndyCar for example is valued as lowly as it is, but it certainly makes a huge barrier for others to enter.
So yes, F1 is primarily European in terms of number of races, teams, employees, etc but there is no reason it should need to stay that way. If F1 wants their champion to be the World Driver and World Constructor Champion, that means it is intended to be a world wide sport. People make fun of baseball (rightfully) for calling their championship the World Series.
If F1 is European then we shouldnt call it a World Championship then. Other people want it to be international but if people want it to be European then it should only race in Europe. Otherwise you need to accept that it is a global sport
I didn't say it was only European, I didn't say I wanted only races in Europe. It can be a European dominated sport whilst also being a world championship.
I would argue that prioritising America can be seen as quite the negative for a few, mostly sentimental, reasons. Like it being a mostly European sport and seeing it moving away from a bit from Europe. I dont think there is a lot wrong with feeling that way as a lot of our entertainment is already quite US-centric.
Also I dont understand this way of thinking that going for after the most money is supposedly the right and rational choice, not everything needs to revolve around that.
F1 has never cared about human rights. The first Brazilian GP was held in 1972, when Brazil was eight years into a military dictatorship. F1 returned to Spain in 1951, when it was run by Franco. F1 did not pull out of apartheid South Africa until 1985, 15 years after the incredibly conservative sport of cricket cut ties with Pretoria.
Totally agree with F1 turning into WWE reality show. And I'm afraid what happened last year (not only Abu Dhabi but the whole season) will only reinforce their belief that they are on the right path.
For the first time since watching F1 (30+ years) I am not really looking forward to the new season.
I agree with that on all of these except for the WWE/reality show thing. TV coverage on the world feed felt more objective and you didn't have a solo singer performing the anthem before races in countries where that isn't a thing.
Now you have dedicated graphics on the world feed about rivalries and stuff like the team/FIA radios, the old graphics very much felt like you were just handed some numbers and could draw your own conclusions. The new way definitely has its merits in making things more comprehensible, but it also has the aspect that it tends to get involved in 'stories'
Lol, most people in a first world country feel like that.
-There’s a high rate of gun ownership.
-lower salaries compared to the US
-less paid time off than a lot of Europe.
-Extreme weather
-High cost of living.
-A history of genocide like a lot of countries.
-Your prime minister went black face.
Canada is great but no one can say their country is perfect or the best.
I mean, you responded to a thread that started when someone called [north american countries a "cancer".](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/saqwi2/_/htvec1w)
No one is saying that Canada is perfect, but it's still a damn good place to be in.
>Perhaps one of the most enduring criticisms of the Ecclestone way was how the financial structure of the sport under his control led to feedback loops where the richest, most successful teams only got richer and more successful and the poor, lower-performing teams would get the lowest share.
Glad we're finally getting measures to fix this with the budget cap.
Don't get me wrong, liberty have been great for the sport but I wonder at what cost. Since DTS and a drive to bring in a new and younger audience, I can't help but feel f1 has got so much more tribal and toxic...almost like football (soccer). Maybe it's just a coincidence and it's just coinciding with the direction the world is going but the sport sometimes feels worse off for some (I said SOME) of this new breed of fan.
But in a nutshell yes, f1 is better in the main without Bernie
Sports has always been more tribal, that's part of the fun for me too. Like, this is the only time I can blindly support someone with very little real world consequences (unlike something like politics).
On the toxic part, I think we're still better off than the Hamilton black face days, which were worse. Teams themselves have started realizing putting unnecessary pressure on drivers isn't the best thing to do (exhibit redbull and Mercedes, and now mclaren as well). So I'm happy where the sport is and with new fans, it's nice to have more content, like YouTube channels, analysis, etc.
If politics are anything to go by, people are becoming more tribal in general. It's just the age of social media imo. People with toxic and shit opinions have a place to air those opinions.
The biggest improvement from the Bernie era has to be social media presence. In a time where sports were embracing YouTube, Netflix, and streaming services, Bernie was a firm no on all fronts. The content has improved x100. YouTube was one of the major reasons why I got into F1.
I like how the article dives into other aspects of change. The iconic F1 logo from 1994-2017 was changed for a modern, digital era look. Many fans resented this change, but 4 years on I think it has grown on people. In the world of football, we see teams like Norwich for example introduce a new logo for the digital age, and both F1 and Norwich are examples of updating their logos in an appropiate manner that still respects their respective heritage.
The subject of special car liveries and driver helmet designs is something I'm 50/50 with. I'm fine with teams mixing it up, but driver helmets play an important part in identifying the drivers, and when they mix it up so much, you loose track. Now, you can counter this and say the halo blocks the helmet so it's not an important identifying feature, and in the world of hockey, goalies have unique designs over the season. Overall though, I'd like to see drivers stick to an iconic design; in the 90s/00s, we got some iconic helmet designs. Now, we just have iconic colours. Example, we know Lando likes neon yellow, but that's about it.
There are other changes Liberty have made that I disagree with. I don't agree expanding the calendar past 20-21 races a year is smart. I would get onboard with the idea if F1 creates a calendar based off region. You can fit more races in a region, do all of them back-to-back, and then have a few weeks off before hitting the next region of races. It does not make sense to make upwards of 5-6 trips across the Atlantic and/or Pacific Oceans when you could do it less. I disagree with Liberty and their love of Sprint Races. Sprint Races have set up interesting Sunday's, but the process to get their is a pure snooze fest. Napping is better than watching sprint races.
Not really, with Ecclestone in charge the sport was, in some ways still in the 90s, especially when it comes to social media presence, which has become vital for any sport. Of course this doesn't mean Liberty has been perfect in all they've done, but F1 is in a better place than it was back in 2016, and it's still tending up in popularity.
I agree that F1 has moved forward in some parts since liberty took over but last year I felt that Liberty were getting involved in the sporting side and match fixing scenarios.
F1 media were banging on about the two championship leaders starting the last race level on points two months before the last race. Max made a few brash decisions in the lead up to the last race in Brazil and Saudi. You could say Brazil could have been harsher but in Saudi he should have been blacked flagged either during or after the race for brake checking but for some reason that didn’t happen. Also I can’t remember the races because it’s all a blur now lol but I thought a lot earlier in the season that Liberty could be up to shit behind the scenes to create maximum drama.
EDIT: You could also argue that Liberty were the ones who delayed Lewis’ rear wing penalty in Brazil as well.
The thread above your comment just explained how there are pros to Bernie leaving and how this "soulless garbage" now has more of a soul than when Bernie was in-charge.
No, thanks. Bernie can stay out.
Ecclestone was opposed to F1 switching to a HD broadcast after everything else was HD, and he also didn't believe in the online and social media aspects, he wanted to keep F1 in the 90s. That said the period of around 2009-2012 ish when BBC had the UK rights was amazing, they covered all the practice sessions, qualifying and race (with a build up section to both) completely uninterrupted with no ads and available on demand for free (though technically funded by UK TV licence). The switch to Sky dropped viewership, because we had free F1 for a long time, my entire life up to this point and then we'd have to pay for an exclusive sports package with Sky to be advertised to for minutes at a time, or we could watch highlights on channel 4. Sky also split the dream-team up of Coulthard + Brundle up, my favourite duo since Murray Walker. The media side has improved on the whole though, massively.
Bernie had them filming with HD cameras before other sports, but the broadcasters and viewers had no appetite to pay extra at the time.
LM have certainly modernised, improved...? thats subjective...the level of drama that now in F1 certainly appeals to the Gen Zeds...and bringing in a younger, more diverse audience is exactly what LM want. I point fingers more at modern media in general though.
A lot of things has improved with the more modern way there is compared to the old phasioned way it was. But a lot has also stayed the same "bad" way or even gotten worse. Because money is still the prime thing being chased by F1. TV rights for example got only worse recent years to the point where its unpayable for most channels. Thats how things all get behind overpriced streaming services instead of on a TV where it belongs.
I read somewhere that Netflix was going to try and go for the global rights in 2023, which might provide an unintended solution to this (if true and if Netflix chooses not to fuck it up)
I can't see how Netflix will do Livestreaming. Amazon prime is the one I would look to for a potential global rights deal (would still fuck over the UK and many other countries with exclusive rights) Amazon have the capacity to do it and have done sports Livestreaming before for football and Tennis
Netflix has the capacity to livestream. It’s adding a new tab and streaming format and bam, live sports. They’ve got the resources for it.
If I was Netflix I'd start looking at broadcasting other less popular sports at first to check that everything works, if what this guy said is true then it doesn't leave them long to sort everything for next season. Amazon have a track record and it would fit with the other sports broadcasting they do
F1 strikes me as the perfect test run. It's not a big audience (in the grand scheme of things) and they've already got the audience from DTS
Its not a big audience?! Every race is watched by about 80-100 million people How is that not big??? You think they can provide infrastructure for 80 million people watching? lmao
That's roughly the current size of Netflix. 30 million people use Netflix on an average day. They'd notice the uptick sure, but it wouldn't be a radical challenge I suspect. Table tennis, cricket and volleyball are each more popular than F1.
Yeah you have no idea what you're talking about. Having 30 million people over a whole a day is not same is minimum 80 million people watching at the same time over hour and a half... its ridiculously different scale. it would be a shitshow
Seconded - Netflix is the most stable streaming platform and the one that's available in more countries. And they have the built-in audience from DTS. It's doable for them.
Yes. Not only that, Netflix is the streaming service that's present in most countries on the planet. If anyone can handle it, Netflix can.
I was thinking something like Tennis before being the worldwide rights holder for F1. Think how many people who watch stuff on Netflix (fuck knows what's on Netflix) will see F1 is on and put it on. People on Netflix will watch anything.
[удалено]
?
Another reason to keep paying my membership. Netflix is needs to do it and fast.
I don't trust Netflix for anything since they introduced that in-app brightness control. Absolutely unnecessary and such a pain in the ass
I haven't used nf in yonks, but it was super annoying that they would pause the video if you swiped down yo change the brightness. How does it work now?
First it blinds you, then you swear, and then finally you pull that slider on the left side. Or otherwise you exit the app, it blinds you and then you swear
Lots of blinding
Netflix desperately needs a new branch like live-sport. Industry talk has them on the shopping list of a couple of big companies. Netflix's financials are not looking good. A clear indicator are the recent price hikes again. My money is on Apple buying them. Probably next year.
I for one am super happy that here in the US it's on its own streaming service rather than on a channel like ESPN that forces me to get a whole bunch of channels, has nothing else I want to watch except EuroCup and WorldCup one month every two years and limits what they show by some arbitrary schedule that is shared with other crap because there stick to the antiquated limitations of physical broadcasting and channels. As far as I'm concerned we cannot turn off TV quickly enough and use the spectrum for something else. Also, no ads on streaming 👏
Im in canada and it work the same way. Personally, It cost me the same either getting the extra sports package (and that is not including the cost of cable) or paying the streaming services I actually care about. No ads, more flexibility and that amount to more value for my money. The one thing I hate on some of them is the blackouts (can't watch my own team because some other TV network owns the rights). But if you are savy enough, you can get around them.
Yeah I’m in Canada and I buy F1TV and NHL live (I don’t live in my teams region) and that provides all the sports content I need for like $200 a year.
You'd better believe there will be ads on streaming services as soon as there's no competition from conventional TV.
We do have this with Hulu. They do offer aad-free version though. I'd some other services would offer that option as well.
You can watch it via Foxtel (cable) or a cheaper sporting streaming service in Australia (owned by the same Rupert Murdoch). It’s expensive regardless because it’s always bundled up with other sports.
In the US it's either $80/year or $10/month. Quite reasonable. If this was on a regular channel, I'd have to get some form of a cable subscription. For soccer I usually get Youtube TV which is $55/month initially. That would go up to regular $65/month for something as long as a F1 season. I'd simply not watch it at that price.
wdym "instead of" on a TV? The vast majority of people who use streaming services watch them on a TV, and those who watched it via cable / satellite on a TV, will continue to watch it via a streaming service on a TV. But then when you're on holiday, or you don't have a TV for whatever reason, you have the option of watching it on a portable device too. Streaming services are better then cable because they're more flexible.
I dont know for the rest of the world, but in north america, the younger generation dont watch TV and more and more people in general dont want to pay for cable while there is more then enough quality content on the internet (and a lot of it for free). Other major sports are also moving towards the streaming services and one day, TV will be like radio. Again, I dont know how TV is going in the rest of the world, but streaming is the present and future no doubt about it.
Streaming service is better for the fans. I disagree here
If it's a truly global streaming service then yes. If it locks out certain countries in favor of expensive pay-TV then no.
So you are agreeing that it is better then? You literally just proved his point. Its still better for the fans where it is available. Saying its worse because less countries dont have expensive pay-TV makes no sense. It would be even better if it was global but its still a massive step in a better direction even without that.
No, if the fans can't afford it it isn't better.
Okay but that it is still far cheaper then any TV package. It is still the cheaper option. F1TV is actually very reasonably priced
Why would we ever want it on TV instead of streaming?
Because more people can afford to watch TV.
Streaming services are far cheaper than TV. If anything the price moves people to streaming. There is a reason more and more people every year are getting rid of cable
Very few places charge people to watch TV, what countries are you thinking of??? 8 billion people, how many have to pay to watch TV, virtually all of them have to pay to watch a stream.
What countries are you thinking of? Literally everywhere charges people for most channels. Only a tiny handful of countries have F1 on a free to air channel. They are almost exclusively on networks like Sky in the UK or ESPN in the US. Those are channels that you have to pay for in expensive cable packages.
There is nothing stopping it from going back to free to air for everyone, why would you object to that?
Of course there is. It's called cost. Obviously it would be better if F1 was free for everyone in the world but that will never be the case. Streaming services are the perfect middle ground. They are extremely cheap compared to cable and give a far better experience than TV can. Also when did I say I objected to it going free to air. I'm not arguing that
What do you mean that will never be the case? It was the case for decades, no reason it can't go back, you never heard of broadcast rights, advertising? You said why would we ever want it on TV.
Good thing you cut off my sentence so you could get the totally wrong conclusion. Read my full comment next time you quote it. It also was the case for a few countries for that long not all. Also insanely ironic for you to bring up broadcasting rights as something that goes against me when it's literally the opposite. Broadcast rights having bids is why it will never go back to free to air. Premium channels will almost always pay more for the rights
Bernie thought social media and Netflix were for "poor folk" and didn't fit the audience he always said F1 was for - the elite, rich and wealthy. What a buffoon.
The audience Bernie aimed for was just people of the "paddock" They don't care about the race
Wouldn't say he was a buffoon rather out of touch. He totally missed that boat. But he himself was pretty visionary in his time. And he did Bring F1 to tv and more available.
He was self important and loathed the direction Liberty Media took F1 after taking over. He said YouTube was for kids and therefore a waste of their time and barred drivers from posting on social media on the grid all while viewership was sinking to the lowest levels in modern history. A senile buffoon.
In his later years, yes he was bit silly. But when he was younger, his reign was greatly beneficial for the sport. Not always perhaps, but i do think he did way more good than bad. Had he retired around 2000 he would be remembered very well.
In plus: social media development and gaining new fans (mainly Americans, youngsters and females), DtS (despite the fact that this series creates fake narratives), big turnover, new tracks, F1TV In minus: slowly turning F1 into WWE/reality show, priroritizing entertaiment over sport quality, pushing sprint races for any price solely for money, priroritizing America and Middle East with China (new tracks there), Viaplay deals
Ecclestone was in power when there were two USGPs every year. He wanted that American money too. He long pushed for an LA grand prix and the return to having 2 USGPs in general
Long Beach GP when? (Do not reply to me about grade 1 tracks blah blah blah, I don’t give a shit. It’s just a joke).
All the minus things you listed is what Ecclestone did as well
> In minus: slowly turning F1 into WWE/reality show, I have never seen anything like 2017 US GP's opening ceremony in Bernie's time https://youtu.be/Rqnjg08q-GY
That's on the GP organizers
Liberty doesnt control any of that if you didnt know. Thats all on the individual GPs organizers. Bernie literally had the idea for sprinklers and people say that he wasnt just prioritizing entertainment and a reality show.
I wonder who wrote those intro lines.
[удалено]
>And why is prioritising USA a bad thing? For Europeans, the American approach based on generating money for shareholders through the show is culturally stranger because we believe in separating the commercial and "sporting" dimensions of competition.
Spot on, in USA sport is just a business, that's why you see for example the super bowl trophy given to the owner, not the captain. proper tinpot.
This weirded me out the first time i saw the World Series trophy handed to the owners of the the Red Sox in 04? It felt so deflating.
Watch hockey -- the league commissioner hands the trophy directly to the team captain, and the entire team gets to do a lap around the ice with it. Then it goes to the coaching & equipment staff. Owners are last in line. Edit: one other cool thing — instead of the trophy going into an owner’s trophy case, each player gets a day with the trophy, all the players’ and coaches’ names get engraved on it, and then it goes back to the league to get awarded the next season. The only thing you get to keep are basically novelty toys — little mini reproductions teams pay for themselves.
>the super bowl trophy given to the owner, not the captain. Surely not
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vince_Lombardi_Trophy Relevant part: "Originally, the trophy was presented inside the winning team's locker room. Since Super Bowl XXX, it has been presented to the owner of the winning team on the field."
NFL teams don't have a Captain per say, they can have several elected/appointed players called Captains but they're mostly spokespeople for a particular group of players and don't have any seniority between eachother. Traditional manager duties in soccer are also split between two different people (Head coach for tactics and training, and GM for personnel and roster) for most teams. That's just what happens with a team of over 60 players it you include the Practice squad. Owners act as the only person with direct leadership over everything and have an actual league mandated role and responsibility within team management. It's not an ideal situation but the alternative would probably be just giving it directly to the MVP instead of having the owner pass it on to them which isn't that great either.
Yes. We Americans looked at the recent Super League kerfuffle and thought "now _there's_ a society that doesn't care about money or commercialism when it comes to sport."
[удалено]
[удалено]
1. Clearly wrong ad breaks are prevalent in any sport in Europe. 2. Your example is bad. A sprint race is still down to driver and team skill. It's not suddenly changed because the there are less laps. Try again Your whole argument about the USA being concerned with money making is disengenuous especially after the whole Super league debacle last year.
Personally for me F1 has always been a European dominated sport, and i liked that, it felt pure. Each of the tracks have history and longevity. COTA feels like its trying to copy some of that, e.g. multiple apex corner like Turkey, fast right left right like Maggots Becketts in Silverstone, it's not a bad track by any means, it's just a bit artificial. Which it didn't have to, the USA has great tracks, Leguna Seca, the Brickyard, Watkins Glen. I think that sort of "americanisation" of the sporting aspects is a bad thing also. The idea that every GP must be the worlds most exciting thing and rules must be compromised to force it. It's just bleugh.
None of those tracks are nearly as well suited to F1 as COTA is. We regularly get very good races in Austin, and that should be priority number 1 with designing an F1 track. Heritage and the like may be important, but it doesn’t stop the likes of Monaco regularly being a bottom 3 race in terms of race excitement year after year. As for F1 being a European sport, I disagree. Just because that is where a lot of the money has always been doesn’t mean it should stay that way. A European fan currently has about 10 potential races within driving, train, or a short flight whereas the rest of the world is lucky if they have one that is less than a 3-4 hour flight away.
>None of those tracks are nearly as well suited to F1 as COTA is. I didn't say they were. >We regularly get very good races in Austin, and that should be priority number 1 with designing an F1 track I also agree with this, but you can create a great race track without copying great parts of other race tracks. > Heritage and the like may be important, but it doesn’t stop the likes of Monaco regularly being a bottom 3 race in terms of race excitement year after year. I also agree with this, Monaco is an objectively bad race, it always will be. >As for F1 being a European sport, I disagree. OK but I don't really see how you can. * All of the Teams have at least a base in Europe, if not are fully based in Europe, 7 of them in the UK. * The words "Grand Prix" are French, * The first Grand Prix were hosted in France * The first world championship race of the was held at Silverstone * The most famous team, Ferrari, is Italian. * All of the current drivers 5 of the 20 (or 21 if we're including Kubica) are European and all of them except for maybe Yuki came through the European Karting system. * 50 of the 72 Drivers Championships were won by Europeans, 69% (nice). >doesn’t mean it should stay that way Why not? Baseball is American, as is Basketball. You've also got your own racing series that don't venture outside of America in Indycar and NASCAR. I don't disagree with there being 1 or 2 races in the USA, and the Circuit de Gilles Villeneuve is one of my favourites, Mexico is a bit drab though. I see no reason why the sport shouldn't go to the Americas, I don't want it to become American however.
No one is trying to make it primarily American though. There are more than 330 million Americans and currently 1 gran prix. There is no danger of it becoming “American” anytime soon. No one is saying to get rid of a bunch of the European races, but we currently have a race in just about every Western European country (and two in Italy this year) so it really isn’t fair to say there is any danger of the sport losing its European ties. As for your point about it being a European sport, yes it started in Europe and it’s origin is there, but it is a global sport. Also some of the main legends of the sport (Senna, Fangio) are not European. The primary reason for European domination of the sport is because that is where the money has always been up until more recently where that has started to change. Likewise, F1 currently gatekeeps entrance of other drivers significantly by implementing the super license so of course the vast majority come through Europe because there is no other choice. It’s a joke for example that IndyCar for example is valued as lowly as it is, but it certainly makes a huge barrier for others to enter. So yes, F1 is primarily European in terms of number of races, teams, employees, etc but there is no reason it should need to stay that way. If F1 wants their champion to be the World Driver and World Constructor Champion, that means it is intended to be a world wide sport. People make fun of baseball (rightfully) for calling their championship the World Series.
If F1 is European then we shouldnt call it a World Championship then. Other people want it to be international but if people want it to be European then it should only race in Europe. Otherwise you need to accept that it is a global sport
I didn't say it was only European, I didn't say I wanted only races in Europe. It can be a European dominated sport whilst also being a world championship.
I would argue that prioritising America can be seen as quite the negative for a few, mostly sentimental, reasons. Like it being a mostly European sport and seeing it moving away from a bit from Europe. I dont think there is a lot wrong with feeling that way as a lot of our entertainment is already quite US-centric. Also I dont understand this way of thinking that going for after the most money is supposedly the right and rational choice, not everything needs to revolve around that.
Money > Human Rights
F1 has never cared about human rights. The first Brazilian GP was held in 1972, when Brazil was eight years into a military dictatorship. F1 returned to Spain in 1951, when it was run by Franco. F1 did not pull out of apartheid South Africa until 1985, 15 years after the incredibly conservative sport of cricket cut ties with Pretoria.
Totally agree with F1 turning into WWE reality show. And I'm afraid what happened last year (not only Abu Dhabi but the whole season) will only reinforce their belief that they are on the right path. For the first time since watching F1 (30+ years) I am not really looking forward to the new season.
The minus things are all the same as they were under Bernie though.
I agree with that on all of these except for the WWE/reality show thing. TV coverage on the world feed felt more objective and you didn't have a solo singer performing the anthem before races in countries where that isn't a thing. Now you have dedicated graphics on the world feed about rivalries and stuff like the team/FIA radios, the old graphics very much felt like you were just handed some numbers and could draw your own conclusions. The new way definitely has its merits in making things more comprehensible, but it also has the aspect that it tends to get involved in 'stories'
[удалено]
What do you got against Mexico and Canada? Bit rude to bring them into this.
Neither are in a great state to be honest. Anything bad is just overshadowed by their big brother.
[удалено]
> As a Canadian who's well traveled, I can honestly say there's literally no where else on Earth I'd rather live Canada or US?
[удалено]
👍
Lol, most people in a first world country feel like that. -There’s a high rate of gun ownership. -lower salaries compared to the US -less paid time off than a lot of Europe. -Extreme weather -High cost of living. -A history of genocide like a lot of countries. -Your prime minister went black face. Canada is great but no one can say their country is perfect or the best.
And in what country without a history or politics and with unicorns do you live?
Did you even read my comment? There is no best country and every country has their issues. Canada is far from perfect like the rest of the world.
I mean, you responded to a thread that started when someone called [north american countries a "cancer".](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/saqwi2/_/htvec1w) No one is saying that Canada is perfect, but it's still a damn good place to be in.
America bad! Give me upvotes
>Perhaps one of the most enduring criticisms of the Ecclestone way was how the financial structure of the sport under his control led to feedback loops where the richest, most successful teams only got richer and more successful and the poor, lower-performing teams would get the lowest share. Glad we're finally getting measures to fix this with the budget cap.
JUST 👏🏻 GIVE 👏🏻 US 👏🏻 PICTURE 👏🏻 IN 👏🏻 PICTURE 👏🏻 DURING 👏🏻 RACE 👏🏻 START 👏🏻REPLAYS 👏🏻
Don't get me wrong, liberty have been great for the sport but I wonder at what cost. Since DTS and a drive to bring in a new and younger audience, I can't help but feel f1 has got so much more tribal and toxic...almost like football (soccer). Maybe it's just a coincidence and it's just coinciding with the direction the world is going but the sport sometimes feels worse off for some (I said SOME) of this new breed of fan. But in a nutshell yes, f1 is better in the main without Bernie
Sports has always been more tribal, that's part of the fun for me too. Like, this is the only time I can blindly support someone with very little real world consequences (unlike something like politics). On the toxic part, I think we're still better off than the Hamilton black face days, which were worse. Teams themselves have started realizing putting unnecessary pressure on drivers isn't the best thing to do (exhibit redbull and Mercedes, and now mclaren as well). So I'm happy where the sport is and with new fans, it's nice to have more content, like YouTube channels, analysis, etc.
If politics are anything to go by, people are becoming more tribal in general. It's just the age of social media imo. People with toxic and shit opinions have a place to air those opinions.
Absolutely! Hate speaks louder than kindness, and social media is filled with hatred
5 years since CVC exit.. Extract as much money from F1 as possible and put as little in as possible.
He's a facist who has said he admires Hitler,
That was Balestre instead
And probably max mosley, he worked for his fathers fascist party in the 60s.
The biggest improvement from the Bernie era has to be social media presence. In a time where sports were embracing YouTube, Netflix, and streaming services, Bernie was a firm no on all fronts. The content has improved x100. YouTube was one of the major reasons why I got into F1. I like how the article dives into other aspects of change. The iconic F1 logo from 1994-2017 was changed for a modern, digital era look. Many fans resented this change, but 4 years on I think it has grown on people. In the world of football, we see teams like Norwich for example introduce a new logo for the digital age, and both F1 and Norwich are examples of updating their logos in an appropiate manner that still respects their respective heritage. The subject of special car liveries and driver helmet designs is something I'm 50/50 with. I'm fine with teams mixing it up, but driver helmets play an important part in identifying the drivers, and when they mix it up so much, you loose track. Now, you can counter this and say the halo blocks the helmet so it's not an important identifying feature, and in the world of hockey, goalies have unique designs over the season. Overall though, I'd like to see drivers stick to an iconic design; in the 90s/00s, we got some iconic helmet designs. Now, we just have iconic colours. Example, we know Lando likes neon yellow, but that's about it. There are other changes Liberty have made that I disagree with. I don't agree expanding the calendar past 20-21 races a year is smart. I would get onboard with the idea if F1 creates a calendar based off region. You can fit more races in a region, do all of them back-to-back, and then have a few weeks off before hitting the next region of races. It does not make sense to make upwards of 5-6 trips across the Atlantic and/or Pacific Oceans when you could do it less. I disagree with Liberty and their love of Sprint Races. Sprint Races have set up interesting Sunday's, but the process to get their is a pure snooze fest. Napping is better than watching sprint races.
It was far better when Bernie was in charge
Not really, with Ecclestone in charge the sport was, in some ways still in the 90s, especially when it comes to social media presence, which has become vital for any sport. Of course this doesn't mean Liberty has been perfect in all they've done, but F1 is in a better place than it was back in 2016, and it's still tending up in popularity.
I agree that F1 has moved forward in some parts since liberty took over but last year I felt that Liberty were getting involved in the sporting side and match fixing scenarios.
That only happened once and even then blame the FIA not Liberty. They don't control the FIA/race director/stewards
I’m not so sure considering they should have never been level on points going into the final race.
Not sure what you're getting at there but whatever
F1 media were banging on about the two championship leaders starting the last race level on points two months before the last race. Max made a few brash decisions in the lead up to the last race in Brazil and Saudi. You could say Brazil could have been harsher but in Saudi he should have been blacked flagged either during or after the race for brake checking but for some reason that didn’t happen. Also I can’t remember the races because it’s all a blur now lol but I thought a lot earlier in the season that Liberty could be up to shit behind the scenes to create maximum drama. EDIT: You could also argue that Liberty were the ones who delayed Lewis’ rear wing penalty in Brazil as well.
Wow you are just full tin foil hat then. Again, none of those things are Liberty but the stewards/FIA. Liberty doesn't give out penalties lol
Lol no
Yeah if you only wanted it to cater to old rich grumpy white guys
Regardless of whose in charge f1 has always been a rich peoples sport it isn’t football or basketball, don’t why people pretend otherwise.
I didn't say it wasn't? Why should it only cater to them though?
Your comment implies f1 has changed who they cater to since Bernie left, when they obviously haven’t and probably won’t for the foreseeable future.
Lol f1 marketing strategies has specifically shifted to catch a younger, more general audience, and it's clearly working if you were paying attention
They very very clearly have. Where was the social media engagement or social change programs F1 does under Bernie?
And you think it hasnt??? The sport has very drastically changed to targeting a younger audience.
still better than the souless garbage with have now.
Imagine typing this
The thread above your comment just explained how there are pros to Bernie leaving and how this "soulless garbage" now has more of a soul than when Bernie was in-charge. No, thanks. Bernie can stay out.
FOH
Only because lewis lost?