http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9550930.stm
Basically BBC get half the races live, Sky get all of them live.
The BBC article here puts a lot of spin on all this being good deal etc but it means free to view looses half of the F1 for the first time since, well forever?
What are peoples thoughts?
I don't have Sky Sports as Sky is a bit of a waste of money (as are all subscription TV services), henceforth I won't be watching the Sky races. That's about it really.
It's a bit of a let down for dedicated racing fans but better than losing it altogether. At least we still seem to get the 'important' races.
Quote from: Clock'd 0Ne on August 01, 2011, 10:37:56 AM
It's a bit of a let down for dedicated racing fans but better than losing it altogether. At least we still seem to get the 'important' races.
Better then nothing, true but they way things seem to head - Just what will be left on free to air TV in a years time, not a lot.
Does this means the TV Licence price will come down? No? ::)
Apart from Top Gear, i rarely bother watching the BBC Channels now, and find myself more on C4, E4, More4, Film4.
I watch Top Gear, F1 on Sunday if I'm about and any interesting documentaries on throughout the week, most of which now appear to be about using fancy graphics to make points instead and dumbed down with analogy after anology to rehash over the same point just in case the people watching the pretty picshures didn't get it the first time.
Also, WTF is with this new trend of spending the first ten minutes of programme run time as some sort of extended introduction discussing what they will cover over the remaining 50 minutes? Scrap that crap and just give us the full hour FFS!
Quote from: Clock'd 0Ne on August 01, 2011, 16:15:45 PM
I watch Top Gear, F1 on Sunday if I'm about and any interesting documentaries on throughout the week, most of which now appear to be about using fancy graphics to make points instead and dumbed down with analogy after anology to rehash over the same point just in case the people watching the pretty picshures didn't get it the first time.
Also, WTF is with this new trend of spending the first ten minutes of programme run time as some sort of extended introduction discussing what they will cover over the remaining 50 minutes? Scrap that crap and just give us the full hour FFS!
Most modern British TV is infantalised. Documentaries are mainly aimed at the lowest common denominator and drama tends to feel like Dr Who as though it has been written for children.
Even going back just a few years it was never this bad though.
Very disappointing surely there is more to this than meets the eye? The viewing figures are higher domestically than they expected and over the last few races it has been pointed out how many other counties use the BBC's coverage, ...unless they are giving it away surely that must offset the production costs quite a bit?
I stopped watching F1 for the most part when it was on ITV apart from Martin Brundle it was shocking, the last few seasons on the BBC have been outstanding and I have even tuned into qualifying on the Saturday because the coverage has been that good.
I would be tempted to get sky sports if you could just get it on its own ...but they force you to get a bunch of channels I would never watch! ...well there is always the internet when its not on the BBC and then nobody gets my viewing figure, I'm not going to feel in the slightest way bad about it tbh! :yarr:
http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/keepf1onthebbc
24k on that petition already is quite impressive.
Quote from: neXus on August 01, 2011, 23:30:40 PM
24k on that petition already is quite impressive.
Interesting to see different opinions on different forums. On the PF1 forums they're saying out of 6M UK viewers affected, and potentially 60M users worldwide that will suffer a knock on effect (BBC sell their coverage to other countries...) that 20,000 was pretty poor. Personally I think most people don't tend to bother with online petitions so they're not a great indicator most of the time.
Whats shocking is that its actually our license fee thats helped keep F1 off the free to air channels. C4 and C5 were both interested and claimed they had the finance so the BBC did a deal with Sky to stop it going to them. This way they keep some of the races and prevent non sky customers from tuning into their rival channels. For a public funded business thats pretty bad.
Personally I'm off to order my Sky package. Not because I'm not annoyed or don't care, but purely because F1 is my favourite thing in the world and has been since I was 6. Besides which the missus has agreed to stop hogging my Astraweb if she has Sky with the movie channels so I'm just getting the full package.
It Goes deeper then just F1.
BBC are in the sh*t and it seems daft that they charge more for the TV Licence then ever (And want it to go up!) yet are offering less and less on the TV and loose more and more things to other TV Channels.
I am told that there have been less and less movies on the beeb in the last few years, Overall less sport, Rumours of sky trying to get Wimbledon and Poorer quality shows.
Quote from: neXus on August 02, 2011, 12:17:30 PM
It Goes deeper then just F1.
BBC are in the sh*t and it seems daft that they charge more for the TV Licence then ever (And want it to go up!) yet are offering less and less on the TV and loose more and more things to other TV Channels.
I am told that there have been less and less movies on the beeb in the last few years, Overall less sport, Rumours of sky trying to get Wimbledon and Poorer quality shows.
What little money they do have they want to plough into crap dramas. Two spring to mind recently, a faux sci-fi affair with Jamie Bamber where nothing happened and some undersea submarine thing that, despite a sizeable budget for TV, still managed to look and feel like crap.
They also put far too much money into their "flagship" shows like Dr Who, even though it's a relatively poorly written children's program.
I think that's a little harsh on those, the submarine thing especially wasn't terrible by any stretch and certainly looked good enough, it just suffered from plodding along. I don't expect HBO scale productions from the Beeb but I would like them to take a long, hard look at their programming and cater to the more intellectual audiences like they used to. The people that don't want to watch sh*t programmes such as "Sex Educate My Daughter the Embarassing Bodied, Big, Fat, Gypsy X-Factor Slut with British Talent - Get Her Out of The Jungle and Into a Nightmare B&B Where We've Swapped the Owners and the Owner's Wives (On Ice and the Wives Get A Makeover)"
It wouldn't cost much to make a British version of The Walking Dead, some people have made Zombie movies on a budget of £100s, and you don't need to be getting stars that people know, they could do something like C4 (Skins, Misfits) where they take the up and coming actors and place them in the show as well as a few "Guest Appearances" from veterans, if done well it would work out but i can't see them having Blood/Swearing etc on the BBC, unless its really late at night.
Quote from: Clock'd 0Ne on August 02, 2011, 13:56:41 PM
I think that's a little harsh on those, the submarine thing especially wasn't terrible by any stretch and certainly looked good enough, it just suffered from plodding along. I don't expect HBO scale productions from the Beeb but I would like them to take a long, hard look at their programming and cater to the more intellectual audiences like they used to. The people that don't want to watch sh*t programmes such as "Sex Educate My Daughter the Embarassing Bodied, Big, Fat, Gypsy X-Factor Slut with British Talent - Get Her Out of The Jungle and Into a Nightmare B&B Where We've Swapped the Owners and the Owner's Wives (On Ice and the Wives Get A Makeover)"
The submarine thing was terrible in my opinion. It had a good bunch of actors in it but they must have been poorly directed because some of the performances were badly stilted. The sets also looked disturbingly cheap and nasty, with lots of banks and flashy lights that did nothing in particular, walls that wobbled and the dialogue was largely made up of stern faced gurning at the camera followed by someawful techno-babble. It felt like a bunch of kids playing at submarine rather than a serious production.
As an aside one of the best "made for TV" things in recent years has to be Channel 4's Dead Set. For a relatively cheap budget they managed to get some rather good performances from the actors and it all looked quite spiffy, but most importantly the narrative was bang on and kept the pace going throughout.
That's not exactly hard to achieve though when you consider the set was already made up. All they really achieved with Dead Set was some good dialogue (it seems we have Charlie Brooker to thank for that) and nice makeup effects. In fact the standout performance of the show was clearly Andy Nyman's, the rest being completely forgettable.
Don't get me wrong I enjoyed it, but it's hardly groundbreaking stuff, you could come up with the concept over lunch.
Sherlock holmes is very good, BBC have great departments and do great stuff, no doubt in that, it is all about the people upstairs, Top gear is one of the best shows around globally.
But again - Top Gear have had their budget slashed, All the kids shows over the years have had their stuff slashed and good international cartoons are all but gone off the BBC.. Just goes on.
Nige, I think while the programs you and I and others hate that are on other channels, thing with those is they make a crap load of cash. BBC not spending money to pick up high popularity shows is part of its downfall. They always seem to look to make cheaper and far less interesting versions which end up being a waste of money and crap.
They need something like "The Voice" OR XFactor to get viewers and the money even if they are crap.
BBC no adds concept I have always loved but over here in New Zealand there are indeed TO MANY advert breaks but all the channels have add's and there is no licence fee. The good shows and big shows and international shows and movies are spread across all the channels.
Free to view TV is still a shadow of what it was due to Sky of course but it is at least not the fall BBC seems to be in.
Again, BBC has amazing stuff - iplayer is out on iPad etc but again due to the big wig decisions they are not making money from it. Free to people in the UK but sell a service to people outside the country to watch the shows. British people abroad miss watching some UK shows so make money off them, they would pay!
BBC has not been run properly for years.
I get what you're saying Liam but I think you crossed over slightly from the point I was trying to make, that while I have no qualms per se with the celebrity/reality/makeover challenge type programming being available for people to rot away their evening watching, this is where the BBC can capitalise by showing or continuing to show excellent dramas, scientific/nature studies and documentaries that the other channels don't provide.
Which brings me neatly back to sports and the BBCs excellent coverage of those they do show, something they really should be looking to maintain for the reasons above. WTF else are they going to fill the Sunday afternoon slots with really, repeats or garbage I'm guessing?
Quote from: Clock'd 0Ne on August 02, 2011, 20:45:04 PM
I get what you're saying Liam but I think you crossed over slightly from the point I was trying to make, that while I have no qualms per se with the celebrity/reality/makeover challenge type programming being available for people to rot away their evening watching, this is where the BBC can capitalise by showing or continuing to show excellent dramas, scientific/nature studies and documentaries that the other channels don't provide.
Which brings me neatly back to sports and the BBCs excellent coverage of those they do show, something they really should be looking to maintain for the reasons above. WTF else are they going to fill the Sunday afternoon slots with really, repeats or garbage I'm guessing?
Do not get me wrong, in theory that is sound. BBC win awards for their shows, as I said they do make some great stuff.
BUT you need to make money and the shows you and I are likely to hate actually bring in that money and BBC needs money.
I think this is an absolute joke. The bbc has blamed it on not having as much money now, as when they first got the contract. How is that? the license fee has gone up and average wages has dropped so that is just a complete lie.
Viewing figures for the f1 have been on average around 4million this season. Apparently it costs £3million per race, that does sound like alot but it is about 75p per viewer, an absolute bargain imo.
Top gear funds alot of it shows through its own sales so get relatively little license fee money.
Given that the BBC's income is around £5billion in total there absolutely no need for this at all.
Even though I am a MASSIVE F1 fan I will be voting with my feet and not bothering much with it much after this.
The teams and sponsors will see revenue drop massively and F1 will go back to the bad old days. Cheers Bernie.
BBC is run by a bunch of idiots basically.
Great talent in many departments but run by idiots.
Pretty much very similar with the SCI, SCYFY or what ever they want to call it channel. Great shows, they have put in for some awesome shows but if profit margins are not as good as the people upstairs like then they move shows into "Death time slots" to kill them on purpose etc.
From what I have seen the BBC Coverage has been fantastic, we do get it pretty much as is a week later here and looks great! Again the teams at work generally do a great job.
To be fair though the BBC got handed the contract on a plate, at the time Bernie and Co knew there would be a huge backlash if they just gave it Sky (Who did bid more for it when the found out ITV was giving it up) and it was a chance that the BBC could not ignore.
And as you said Deviance they have got GREAT viewing figures considering F1 was in decline in general anyway due to the sport getting boring.
But how the BBC is I do not think they could afford it even when they got it.
Take the Podcast stuff. Renaming it "Free Download" But not doing it across the board, not updating the website properly, keeping it in podcast in some places and all he other daft stuff behind that decision - Creates more confusion and is plain DUMB, yet the people up in their high chairs thought it was a good idea.
BBC needs people who are with modern times running the company and they just do not have that.
I think it's more to do with the government interfering and telling them what and where to spend there money ?
licence fee goes up, but not in line with inflation ? (last few times anyway?) so the money they do get it worth less.
personally... I think they BBC is worth every penny... even if you don't watch TV... there news/live coverage of... pretty much everything is watched and read all over the world... the BBC is the only modern thing we're globally known for these days? it's the one thing that really shines out...
the uk is starting to disappear and blend into the background... 50 years from now when the new superpowers such as India/China/Africa etc.. are running the show we won't even get a mention.... at least the BBC gets our name out there...
Quote from: Clock'd 0Ne on August 01, 2011, 16:15:45 PM
Also, WTF is with this new trend of spending the first ten minutes of programme run time as some sort of extended introduction discussing what they will cover over the remaining 50 minutes? Scrap that crap and just give us the full hour FFS!
Richard Hammond is worst for this. "We're going to show you... in a minute we'll use our gubbings to show you... we let you see...
Love the BBC though, sometimes they get things done brilliantly.
Yes he is, but you do kind of expect it from his series'. I started watching that mathermatical one about hidden numbers in nature, and it was the same deal. I think what really annoys me about it is that you can't even blame it on just one production team, because it seems to be trend in everything ranging from those over to Andrew Marr's Megacities (the worst for this repetition bollocks and the most dumbed down piece I've seen yet) and even Brian Cox's series on the universe.
I can forgive all that for what is generally high quality, watchable material across the board. BBC3 especially is a triumph in my eyes, its got hold of some fantastic comedies this past year.
Quote from: Clock'd 0Ne on August 03, 2011, 21:21:09 PM
Yes he is, but you do kind of expect it from his series'. I started watching that mathermatical one about hidden numbers in nature, and it was the same deal. I think what really annoys me about it is that you can't even blame it on just one production team, because it seems to be trend in everything ranging from those over to Andrew Marr's Megacities (the worst for this repetition bollocks and the most dumbed down piece I've seen yet) and even Brian Cox's series on the universe.
I can forgive all that for what is generally high quality, watchable material across the board. BBC3 especially is a triumph in my eyes, its got hold of some fantastic comedies this past year.
The more times they reiterate a point, the shorter the program can be, the cheaper the budget imo, its all about saving money, thats my theory. This is why on ITV when you watch these Obstacle course shows they show you the same failure from 26 different viewpoints.
Its yet more Americanisation - US TV has been doing this since the 80's. Just check out anything involving police chases, or more recently the US Gordon Ramsey series - absolutely loaded with replays and 'coming up...'. As Bacon says they do it to fill time and cut costs.
Let's not forget that the BBC were partly responsible for Band Of Brothers, so it's not like they make sh*te all the time. I think it's probably due to new management. They'll eventually leave or get fired and maybe we'll see some decent programs come back