Bad/costly news for F1 Fans

[Lorry]

IMO F1 got boring a long time ago and these days I prefer spending my time (and money) at the speedway watching locals do mad things in something they welded together in their shed.  It's much more fun and much more accessible.

I never thought I'd agree with Doris, especially when it comes to what men do in sheds, but it is nice to feel it and smell it and kick the tyres, and you could do that at Le Mans not so long ago

[Nordic]

Of course they're faster now, but there was something really romantic about that era (I assume your talking about the seventies).  It wasn't the sanitized, over regulated, made for TV extravaganza that F1 has become.  They were still racing on the classic circuits (Zandvoort, Osterriechring, Kyalami, etc.) not some cookie cutter Tilke track in the Middle Eastern desert somewhere.  It wasn't all glorious, some really awful things happened, it was terribly dangerous, but watching the drivers laying it on the line, knowing the risk-reward factor, made it impossible not to be attracted to it.
On a different note, looks like the USGP in Austin has fallen apart, wow, never saw that coming  I think I made the comment when the circuit and race was first announced that I'll believe it when I see cars turning laps, too many people with lots of money and grand ideas, that have no idea how Bernie and his henchmen actually operate.  I give the New Jersey race even less chance of actually taking place.  Dorna did the smart thing and re-upped their MotoGP contract with IMS, and if Bernie does really want a race in the US, he should go back to the folks at 16th & Georgetown with his cap in his hand and promise not to f**k things up like he did last time.  But we all know he won't do that.  Why do that when he can convince the dictator of rinky-dink little third world nation, that hosting a GP will make his nation important, for a small fee of course.  Travelling to emerging nations, and all that over-used BS that Bernie likes to feed us.
Fax

Right on all counts, but I would not dismiss the current F1 so quickly, rather despite the meddling of the greedy f**k*r BE, F1 is in a bit of a golden age. The drivers seem more human, Vettal is a class act and would have cut it whatever era he raced in, the others largely seem a more interesting bunch than 10 years ago. The cars are pretty impressive as well.

The selling of the rights to sky is a crime imho, the teams sponsors should have demanded it remained on free to view, but like the teams they are a spineless bunch when faced with BE and his wad.

Seeing as Brundle has taken sky's shilling, I wonder if sky plan to sponsor or make a program about his LM effort. it would make sense for them I would have thought.

RE the US GP, if Bernie really wanted a GP state side, there are plenty of tracks already in exisitance that would do the job. no need to build a new one.

[smokie]

"Seeing as Brundle has taken sky's shilling"

What a great shame that is. the Beeb will have to look long and hard before they find anyone half as interesting and knowledgeable. I'll quite probably give up on F1 again as a result.

[Rhino]

I work in F1 and i won't be getting sky. and a asking others at work if they haven't got sky they won't be getting it.

[Lorry]

Its all sad but true

Brundle probably had to take the Sky shilling - have you seen what running a LM car can cost

[tn*c]

I have Sky, (as there is no Freeview Signal here at all) and was rather please to see that it will cost no extra to those customers who already have Sky Sports 1 and 2 or Sky HD. Most customers to Sky have HD so most will get it.

I do agree though that the BBC should have the exclusive rights and it is a shame that it will not be shown in full for free next year.

[Martini...LB]

I have Sky, (as there is no Freeview Signal here at all) and was rather please to see that it will cost no extra to those customers who already have Sky Sports 1 and 2 or Sky HD. Most customers to Sky have HD so most will get it.

I do agree though that the BBC should have the exclusive rights and it is a shame that it will not be shown in full for free next year.

Hey Buddy

Hope that fence is not too painful 

>Martini...LB

[Boorish Grobian]

Agreed Nordic with your comments about the current crop of drivers, enormously talented, and most seem really decent blokes.
Its easy to be misty-eyed about the late turbo era, but it would be hard to find a more disagreeable group of human beings than the lot usually standing on the podiums back then.  There were some good men participating then as well, Laffite, Tambay, Warwick, etc. But it was usually a group of world class pissers & moaners getting all the attention.
Fax

[geoffd]

I have Sky, (as there is no Freeview Signal here at all) and was rather please to see that it will cost no extra to those customers who already have Sky Sports 1 and 2 or Sky HD. Most customers to Sky have HD so most will get it.

I doubt that "most" Sky customers have HD, I don't and those that have pre-HD TV's running fine don't either! And anyway, why should HD cost anymore than normal TV???  Personally I won't be increasing my Sky subscription to take on Sports or HD, and I bet they increase the cost somewhere along the line, anyway, to pay for the F1 fees!

I've only ever watched F1 if there isn't something better to do,  I'd watched all of the paint dry in our house by mid-may

Now if Sky announced a 24/7 Endurance Racing channel then that would be a different kettle of fish for all of us!

[Jules G]

I have Sky, (as there is no Freeview Signal here at all) and was rather please to see that it will cost no extra to those customers who already have Sky Sports 1 and 2 or Sky HD. Most customers to Sky have HD so most will get it.

I doubt that "most" Sky customers have HD, I don't and those that have pre-HD TV's running fine don't either! And anyway, why should HD cost anymore than normal TV???  Personally I won't be increasing my Sky subscription to take on Sports or HD, and I bet they increase the cost somewhere along the line, anyway, to pay for the F1 fees!

I've only ever watched F1 if there isn't something better to do,  I'd watched all of the paint dry in our house by mid-may

Now if Sky announced a 24/7 Endurance Racing channel then that would be a different kettle of fish for all of us!

Motors TV comes with the sky sports channels, there is a fair bit of endro stuff on there along with rallying, motorbikes, truck racing, British GT the list goes on....

[termietermite]

Motors is free if you have a Sky Freesat box and the one-off payment card (abt £10 off fleebay).  No need to take all the other cr*p on top or pay Rupert a regular sub'.

[Brad Zarse]

I'm on the other side.  As a Sky Sports HD subscriber, this is good news for me personally - the service that Sky provides to sports, is second to none in this country - yes, it's expensive, but there is no "divine right" that F1 should be Free to Air - if anything, it's a premium branded sport when compared to the likes of the Premier League.  The way football coverage has been improved over the last 10 years, has left F1 lagging WAY behind - time to bring it into the 21st century - and I'm sorry, but the Beeb just can't do that..... Especially given that they are as much under scrutiny as any other public body at the moment with regards to funds.

Vegas! is right - most sky subscribers now, do have HD (sky have been pushing it hard for a long time - to the point that if you're a sky subscriber, then it's the obvious choice). 

Why should HD be more expensive?  Sit down in front of a Full HD (1080p - or 1080i for sky technically) and watch an hours sports.  Then go back to your standard def TV, and I defy you to not pick up the phone and order the HD box and a new TV.  Now the reason it's more expensive, is that every piece of broadcasting kit that Sky had, needed to be replaced, with HD stuff - everything from the cameras, to the production suites - that's no small amount of money.  Just like anything - the money has to come from somewhere, so they charge £10 per month to those of us who choose to take out HD programming.  I for one, would never go back to SD.

But perhaps my view is skewed by the fact that I'm also a football fan and a bit of a techie geek

[gt6]

I am sorry but I disagree, The BBC coverage with no adverts is a much better way for F1 to be shown, and what do you think will happen if Sky see a better way to make money else where, motor racing is also about excitement and not the quality of the pixels on your screen, better that people actually go to see it themselves. Funny how everyone is happy with what they have until a salesmen tells them that they must have the new super/better version and then the old one goes into the bin.

My suggestion to you is cancel Sky and use the money to go and see a sport wether it is racing or football it is even better than HD i promise you 

[clkgtrlm1]

I'm on the other side.  As a Sky Sports HD subscriber, this is good news for me personally

Have to agree with Brad on this one.
Been a Sky subscriber for nearly 20 years now and the service is exemplary. Second to none service, customer service and quality.
I can only remember two service failures in that entire time - and at least one, if not both occasions were weather related!

Could NEVER go back to Land or Freeview services only now.....................................how would I be able to record all 24 hours of Le Mans for heavens sake! ??

So as an existing subscriber, it is really neither here or there to me if GP is shown on BBC or Sports.

However, Of course we want the new SUPER / BETTER version of everything that becomes available - that's what early adopters do (progress). It's fundamental for things to move on surely - and that's a fundamental part of the sport we are discussing.

My suggestion is to keep Sky, but go and see the sport LIVE as well - if that's what you want to do!
And when you get home you can watch the whole thing again (including the bits you missed - you can't see a whole GP circuit or race whilst you are there!) from the comfort of your couch, in full HD and forward through the adverts.

[Brad Zarse]

I am sorry but I disagree, The BBC coverage with no adverts is a much better way for F1 to be shown, and what do you think will happen if Sky see a better way to make money else where, motor racing is also about excitement and not the quality of the pixels on your screen, better that people actually go to see it themselves. Funny how everyone is happy with what they have until a salesmen tells them that they must have the new super/better version and then the old one goes into the bin.

My suggestion to you is cancel Sky and use the money to go and see a sport wether it is racing or football it is even better than HD i promise you 

You're welcome to disagree.  You're wrong - but you can do it anyway

I'm a season ticket holder at Reading FC (which is my team) and I attend Le-Mans every year (OK OK, this one is debatable - but I will return!) and I spent 15 years going to the British Grand Prix religiously.  As well as having a sky subscription now that I have moved out.

Sky have already committed to having no ad breaks during the race....so no change there.  They've bought in the best commentary team they could find - good stuff.  And they can plough money into the viewing experience.  I can't practically get to every F1 round, so these things matter to me.  To my mind, they are the people who can improve F1's coverage. 

As CLKGTRLM1 says (seriously I should really find out who you are in a sober state!) - yes, I'm an early adopter - and I always want the newer version of everything (although not 3d - that doesn't appeal to me at all) - but actually - this is not early adoption any more.  If you haven't got HD capability these days, you're way behind the times..... Think of it as being like not having a CD player in about 1995 - when everyone just...did.....