BBC possibly to drop F1 coverage...

Status
Not open for further replies.
sunama said:
I'm sure that the person who made the decision to buy "the voice", have a boss to answer to.

During their meetings/appraisals, it would be a considerable boon to be able to say that we took on ITV in a ratings war and won. This shows that the programs we have chosen to air are what "the people" (read: license fee payers), want.

If they spend £10M on a program that nobody watches, there would surely be hell to pay and the person who made that decision could get demoted or asked to leave their post.

Remember, these are large sums of money and ratings are VERY IMPORTANT for any TV station.
Click to expand...
The question is with such shows as Strictly competing quite well with X Factor and making a ton of money in the US for the Beeb, why does it feel the need to directly compete with the X Factor with a very similar show?

How well did that Andrew Lloyd Webber nonsense do?

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
okay, look at it another way.

Lets say I am hired today as the BBC Program Controller.

I decide that we are going to air programs that get low(er) ratings, but cost a lot of money (such as F1 vs The Voice (or similar talent show)).

My immediate boss is going to think, this guy has come in and he is showing programs that few people actually watch. This guy is no good. Replace him.

BBC definitely need to think about ratings if only because it is their duty to air shows, which the public want to see. Viewership and popularity is measured by ratings.

Why would any TV station (BBC or otherwise), want to air shows which receive a lower viewership?
 
sunama said:
okay, look at it another way.

Lets say I am hired today as the BBC Program Controller.

I decide that we are going to air programs that get low(er) ratings, but cost a lot of money (such as F1 vs The Voice (or similar talent show)).

My immediate boss is going to think, this guy has come in and he is showing programs that few people actually watch. This guy is no good. Replace him.

BBC definitely need to think about ratings if only because it is their duty to air shows, which the public want to see. Viewership and popularity is measured by ratings.

Why would any TV station (BBC or otherwise), want to air shows which receive a lower viewership?
Click to expand...
Then you have to wonder why they bid in the first place when ITV bowed out. Its not like it had high viewing figures back then anyway. Some would also assume that it makes much more sense to show programming that isnt directly competing with another channel to attempt to maintaining those 'all important' viewing figures than to appear to be in a ratings battle...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
Last edited:
sunama said:
Why would any TV station (BBC or otherwise), want to air shows which receive a lower viewership?
Click to expand...

I see your logic

What we are all baulking at is that F1 has been axed while the BBC asian network continues despite getting barely 500,000 listeners.

Likewise BBC Radio 6 which barely scrapes 1 million.

Yes F1 is said to cost around £50 million a season. but the BBC have just spent £22 million on one single program trying to compete with X Factor.

It most probably won't' and will bomb the same way "Fame Academy" did.

but then it will be too late, and F1 will be lost to Sky Forever.
 
Don't get me wrong...I too (for selfish reasons), am aggrieved that BBC have axed F1. However, I can also see where the BBC are coming from.

Talent shows, for whatever reason are watched by more people than F1, hence the BBC may see this move (away from F1 and into a talent show), as a way to provide enjoyment for the majority of license payers. Also, I am assuming that the cost of the talent show, is less than the cost of showing all F1 races.

Higher ratings, for a lower cost...seems like a no-brainer to me.
 
so how many in here are now planning to get sky sports for the F1?

i caught them doing some F1 news the other day and they were using the same interactive board they use in the football so they could put that to some good use. they also used tony jardine as the info guy so i reckon he will play a part in it.
 
Trouble is BBC are meant To be airing shows for all people. They actually said this the other day. They want some programs for everyone and also to show programs that aren't on other free channels.
It's a bit odd saying that, then say they want to go up against x-factor.

Not planning to get sky, my only hope is that several pubs will know see the opportunity to get extra customers in.
 
I guess going to a pub with a phone and headphones tuned into Radio 5 Live would work. Pointeless to watch it without hearing the commentry properly. Hopefully my gym airs them as I might just watch it there instead.

Definitely not gonna get SS - quite happy to guarantee that ;)

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
I'm thinking some pubs might show it and show it properly now there will be much more demand for it.

However I didn't think of one thing, are sky going to have full replays for the away races which happen at silly o'clock. If they don't that could end the pub idea.
 
sunama said:
Why would any TV station (BBC or otherwise), want to air shows which receive a lower viewership?
Click to expand...
Because the BBC in particular is supposed to have a remit to broadcast a variety of programmes for various tastes, rather than simply the most popular. That's the whole reason it has a license fee, and isn't ad-based. So that it can fund more than just the shows that get the biggest ratings.

Now I'm not saying this is enough of a case for the Beeb to keep F1, but saying they only care about viewer numbers is completely missing the point.
 
Look at BBC4 for example.

Looking around the press it seems like their highest ever viewing figures are just under 1.5 million.

And their biggest ratings come in from .... QI repeats. (repeat in the sense its shown on BBC one first)

Given their determination to support "niche" channels like BBC Four and 6 music.

Why not F1 ? because the leadership at the top don't like F1 of course. They've not had it 3 full years years yet and already let it go to Sky :rolleyes:
 
I hear what you are saying about niche programs, QI and BBC4.

My question to you is: how much does QI cost?

Certainly, you have to look at various factors when deciding what programs you are going to show on the BBC, however, one common denominator is ALWAYS - COST.

If F1 was cheaper, then probably BBC would've kept it, but bearing in mind that "the voice" is cheaper and will get the BBC higher ratings...it would be a brave person to make an argument (to the top execs), for F1.
 
It LESS F1, not completely none.
It is a shame, no doubt about that, but life goes on, things change. How much change has their been in the last 15 years? It'll all change again soon enough.
 
Sadly its just another sport that been let go to Sky

Like Rugby, Football, Golf, Tennis, Cricket, etc..

It was one of the last sports that had free coverage of every event.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom