May as well add that the BBC’s audience is down 25 percent, with Sky Sports F1 down 32 percent year-on-year(2015)
As I've said..F1 is dying a slow death.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/csylt/2015/02/01/f1-loses-25-million-viewers-driven-by-switch-to-pay-tv/
The consequence of this is that although the number of TV viewers has slightly reduced, they are more likely to have a higher disposable income and fervently follow the sport which in turn makes them more valuable to F1’s sponsors. Testimony to this, although the viewer numbers in Britain fell by 1.5 million to 27.6 million last year, the report reveals that “average race audiences actually improved year-on-year. This is where the term ‘committed viewer’ is relevant; the proportion of viewers classified as ‘medium’ and ‘heavy’ both increased by 15% for the dedicated Sky F1 channel, the overall loss has come from fewer casual viewers on the BBC.”
So really you're talking nonsense, as per usual.
Let's try some facts shall we, you got the 32% figure from maybe here
https://f1broadcasting.wordpress.co...ld-cup-kicks-singapore-grand-prix-into-touch/
This is saying Singapore, this race SPECIFICALLY was down year on year
because the rubgy world cup was in at the same damn time. It does not anywhere come close to saying viewing figures are down 32% on sky or 25% on BBC for the year.
https://f1broadcasting.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/belgium-draws-identical-audience-year-on-year/
You could guess from the link name but Spa had the same viewing numbers this year as last year, no drop at all, none. You're making up numbers and entirely misrepresenting others to make your argument. Sky was factually not down 32% for 2015, it was down 32% for a SINGLE race.
Viewing figures are down a small amount, every reputable source offering analysis of this says it's down to subscription TV and was expected before even going the paid tv route. Every sport that goes subscription tv gets less viewers, more money and the viewers they get are worth more to sponsors.
Spa is a good race that people like, it was a good race last year, offers overtaking, high speed, excitement and upsets.... it had the same viewing ratings this year. Singapore is a bad race, it offers little to no overtaking, is fairly slow, looks good because it's night time but always has a safety car and rarely has actually good racing. It was also scheduled against a game millions of people wanted to watch so viewers were down, entirely expected, easily explainable and absolutely not indicative of any overall trend for the year.
https://f1broadcasting.wordpress.com/2015/08/12/uk-f1-tv-viewing-figures-rise-but-sky-hit-the-skids/
Lets go here, oh right, BBC numbers are actually up 12%... sky is down(because it got more expensive this year). The overall numbers are up and it's fairly clear that fans want to watch with free to air increasing, but that people don't want to pay. If Sky was significantly cheaper then many more people would subscribe but they'd get less money and those viewers would be worth less to sponsors.
There is no indication anywhere of F1 slowly dying, picking a single race to attempt to demonstrate a big loss in viewers is beyond ridiculous, it's actively trolling or you showing you're incapable of what is incredibly simple analysis.
Silverstone viewers were up 27% this year as the race didn't clash with Wimbledon, Singapore was down about what 27% on average total because there was rubgy on at the same time.
Sports events clashing cause dramatic swing in viewers in ALL sports and we can see numbers showing the swing up and down in F1 races. F1 also doesn't as yet count streamers, I for one haven't watched a single race not through Sky GO this year and millions of people worldwide stream it.
So I'm still right.
