Why the BBC and Sky joint F1 deal will open the way for augmented broadcasting

Sorry, I don’t see how this is good for F1 fans. Yet another money-orientated sport has ignored the simple fact that less people will be able to watch the full season on tv. More money does not mean a better sport. Not everyone has Sky (who I think have admitted they’ve reached saturation point in the market) but everyone has free-to-air tv. Unless you pay the considerable price of a Sky package that brings all those channels that no-one watches, just to get the few that you do, then you lose out. How is showing a few ‘significant’ races on free-to-air tv beneficial to fans? Oh well, I guess I’ll no longer be watching F1, along with all the other sports that have gone to the highest bidder before them.

I can only support your post. I am saddened that, seemingly dramatically which is unlike me, this is my last year of watching F1. What’s the point in watching just half a season? Shame on the BBC – I would rather have had two more full seasons FTA than half a dozen half-seasons. So that’s football, cricket and now F1 that I don’t watch. I suppose it will leave time, away from looking at advertisements on the cars, to do something less “commercial”.

I guess what I am trying to share with you about the BBC/Sky deal is that the headline news is far worse than its likely to be in reality. There are a lot of people who have been investing in solutions which will change the dynamics of rights-controlled sports such as F1. Not in terms of taking anything away from the rights-holder, but more in terms of adding something fresh and worthwhile for audiences.

I am guessing we’d all agree that the Twitter activity of F1 teams has changed the way we interact with the sport – teams such as LRGP, McLaren, Team Lotus and Williams have really contributed to the insight and enjoyment we gain from following the sport. But this is just the tip of the iceberg, they haven’t been investing this time and effort out of the goodness of their hearts (although they do love the sport) – they’ve done so because this is precisely what demonstrates the value they can offer their team sponsors.

Whilst the broadcast rights are a significant part of F1, the balance of power is shifting back towards the teams who will be using the evidence of social media and its audiences as justification of where the value lies in the sport (just look at the influence Rubens Barichello has with his 1m+ Twitter followers for a sponsor such as Renault) – this will then become a significant card to hold when renegotiating the Concorde agreement (or sooner).

I’ve spoken with several teams and their sponsors and I’ve also worked as a commercial partner of Sky in the past, so I know where their heads are at. Investment in F1 comes from the teams and their partners – not Bernie and the FOM – and ultimately what drives free-to-air access is its appeal to those who invest.

Money money money. It’s all very well talking about how advertisers and sponsors will benefit but they only benefit if potential customers are there to see their products. I won’t subscribe to sky on principle – seeing as how their owners appear to have gone to great lengths to undermine my country and my democratic rights, and how they’ve sought a monopoly position by taking away all of the sports I love. Monopoly = excessive prices. As for the BBC, well, what will we see there – more gameshows and more celebs? Augmented content sounds very “sexy”, but I just want to watch a motor race… No, I think I’ll just get on with fresh air, more exercise and no F1 thanks very much.

What we will see with augmented content is the ability to compile your own viewing experience using what’s available – rather like a broadcast version of Tweetdeck. It’s about empowering the user, which is what the internet does and ultimately the money will follow what users are choosing to do.

I don’t have a crystal ball and cannot say what the cost of this would be – we do all pay for the BBC licence fee, although that’s another institution which is being eroded in the basis that it undermines our freedom of choice.

We obviously need to pay for the sport we love somehow, but it needs to be affordable and Sky will discover just as before with F1 Digital that people won’t pay over the odds no matter how good the coverage.

My suggestion is to voice your opinions loudly, there are people involved in this sport who are listening.

I don’t think the user needs (or particularly wants) to be empowered. They just want to be able to see the sport they love. The BBC has showed that quality coverage will suffice; a viewer doesn’t necessarily need multiple viewing options when the coverage is spot on in the first place.

I remember F1 Digital when it was on Sky nearly a decade ago, I initially paid for it but in the end I found all the additional sources of data (choice of on-board cameras, telemetry data, several choices of commentary) rather overwhelming. I just wanted to watch the race and listen to my favourite commentators.

But I realise some people quite enjoy the simultaneous team tweets and the mclaren.com live timing. Each to their own.

The challenge of introducing an augmented layer to our viewing is ensuring it doesn’t detract from the experience. When telemetry data was first broadcast (revs/gears etc) I found that downright annoying, but I’m used to it now.

I watch F1 because of the on-track drama and admiration for the drivers, not because I’d like to be a team manager – and for me driving is a pure and single-minded pursuit so my viewing of the sport is enhanced by better camera angles and sound feeds, rather than more information.

The big issue for me in today’s headline is the message it conveys about how F1 values its fans. That’s the precious commodity than nobody involved in the sport wants to damage, so hopefully the angry reaction to today’s BBC/Sky news will serve as a wake-up call to those who might be taking our support for granted.

You never know, Bernie might well have been testing the water – he has a track-record of doing so..

But I realise some people quite enjoy the simultaneous team tweets and the mclaren.com live timing. Each to their own.

You never know, Bernie might well have been testing the water – he has a track-record of doing so..

It sounds like a bit of confusion has arisen between the BBC and Bernie. In a blog from Ben Gallop BBC’s Head of F1 – bbc.in/nl53yt – he says that the BBC will broadcast ‘extended highlights’ of the races which it doesn’t cover live.

An hour later FOTA president Martin Whitmarsh is quoted in Autosport saying that the deal is better than at first expected, and “The BBC will show every grand prix IN FULL, half of them live and half of them deferred, so free-to-air is available to everyone.”

Did Bernie budge to the uproar from F1 fans or did the BBC just not understand the deal they signed?