GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => F1 Teams => Topic started by: J.Clark on June 25, 2017, 11:45:54 AM
-
It seems there is a big shake up coming for Mercedes.
There is old money leaving and new money coming in.
What could it all mean?
https://www.facebook.com/formula1insider/videos/1701779433449077/
-
Eddie Jordan is predicting that Mercedes will be sold in the coming years, as the board is looking for a way out in the near future. Based on rumours of a sponsorship shortfall, because of Petronas withdrawing at the end of the season, this may well be true.
-
I can understand teams getting out if things are tough, but if a 'successful' team pulls out, it's going to be tough to find others to invest in the sport.
I honestly think that when Renault pulled out in the 90s it really put the sport into a tail spin that it really hasn't corrected from. (Certainly Renault didn't cause it, but rather their reasons for pulling out have never been truly addressed)
-
I just wonder if there happens to be a world upturn in oil prices and Patronas can afford to stay in the game, will the Malaysia race stay on the calendar. But, it's not looking good.
I don't think AMG will have a problem finding a title sponsor. Mercedes/AstonMartin sounds nice.
-
If Red Bull can sponsor a team why not Coke or Pepsi?
-
So Petronas puts about 40 million into MERCAMG. They claim it has payed off over the years. Your suggestion of USA soft drink companies sponsoring a F1 team got me googling. Coke has it's name all over nascar, NCAA, American Idol and the olympics. Pepsi is kind of the same. Exposure from F1 would be a drop in the bucket for Coke compared to Nascar.
So, who could/would have about 30million euro to partner with Merc.
Interesting,
-
Red Bull was in Indycar and NASCAR so why can't Coke to a little
friendly competition and advertise in F1. By the way Danny did
some great acting today...he drank a RB ina interview with that
big smile on his face.
-
So Petronas puts about 40 million into MERCAMG. They claim it has payed off over the years.
That's probably true as Petronas weren't novice sponsors when they teamed up with Merc, they had previously sponsored both cars and engines(Ferrari's badge engineered under contract) for Sauber, plus they continued as sponsors when BMW took over until the manufacturer suddenly pulled out of F1 in 2008/9.
I'm sure I recall talk of some sort of a lubricants tie up with Merc vehicles division worldwide when the sponsorship was first announced back in 2010. Major motor manufacturers do have other things to offer auto related sponsors who are willing to flatter a Formula 1 team's budget with big bucks, especially if it's the chairman or CEO's vanity project. :D
-
Coca-Cola is an interesting idea. I think that they would be more inclined to get into Formula 1 if it was more easily recognized in the US, which is their largest market (I believe). With Haas making it in with some success, and with racing back in Mexico along with the US and Canada, the American market is likely seeing more F1 than in the years preceding.
NASCAR is falling a bit in popularity in my opinion so Coke may be looking for other "billboards" on which to place their name.
With regard to Red Bull - they are sponsors in almost any and everything to do with any sort of sports whether motors are involved or not. Frankly, I don't know how they can spread themselves out so widely.
-
What's the TV coverage like in the US and Canada as I think that is the telling point as to how popular its becoming?
-
Of all the people I know not one person ever
mentions F1. Since MS is gone I bey not many
Americans can even name 2 F1 drivers.
-
NBC covers it pretty well. If you have the app or the ROKU channel you can watch all 3 practices, qualifying, and the race live or replay stream. Live on NBCsn they usually show FP-2, qually, and the race live. NBC's broadcast channel shows a few races like Canada and the US live. I like Hobbs, Matchett, and Diffey and they have a pre-race show. That said, all forms of racing in the US are declining in popularity. We don't seem to have captured the interest of the so called millennials. Plus ticket prices are way too high. Promoters don't seem to realize it's better to sell 100 tickets at $30 each that 50 tickets at $50 each. PIR installed bleachers along the backstretch when NASCAR first came to Phoenix, but they've removed them now so TV doesn't show all those empty seats. Even the NHRA doesn't pack 'em in the way they did 4-5 years ago and they are the most spectator friendly races I've ever been to.
-
That's interesting Ik that support for motorsport is in the decline which is why the Malaysian GP is stopping a year early and when you see the empty stands in China it makes you wonder if they will survive? There's talk of Turkey coming back on the calendar but they always had empty stands so unless they are going to reduce the entrance charge it'll not improve.
What's all this got to do with this thread?
Its all part of the advertising which is the only reason they enter into the sport but then what is the value of an F1 team and who can afford to buy one?
-
The lower number of people buying tickets is reflected in lower TV ratings as well. Lower ratings, lower attendance mean less advertizing value to people like Petronas.
-
As far as advertising F1 still probably reaches more fans
worldwide for any sporting event. Don't know what would be
second.
-
If the tickets are overpriced, it shouldn't affect the fan base, just more are at home watching on TV. As for filling the tracks, it is obviously a trickle down issue. The local promoter/venue raises most of its money from ticket sales to offset what they have to pay FOM for the privilege of hosting a race. That's a pretty skinny margin. If the FOM adjusted their fees, then the local promoter would be able to lower the tickets to attract more locals. Maybe that would have no effect on China and Turkey, but maybe it would.
I think lower TV ratings is simply that in many markets it is getting more difficult or more expensive to find it live on TV. FOM is selling rights to more pay channels like Sky, and many of us have no interest in buying a pay TV package that has nothing of interest for us other than F1. I will watch Youtube highlights before I pay for an otherwise useless cable package. When we move in the fall, we have all agreed that we will simply have internet TV and use Youtube and Netflix and see how that goes.
-
That's also part of the problem with NASCAR & NHRA drag racing here in the State. NHRA moved from ESPN, which is on almost every basic cable package, to Fox Sports 1 & 2. They are usually available only on higher priced packages. I haven't seen an NHRA race since they switched.
Likewise, many NASCAR races are now on FS1 & 2. NASCAR has also added so many gimmicks to their series that they've driven away many long time fans (like me). The Race to the Chase to the Cup for the Thing (as John Hindhaugh calls it) has made the regular season races pointless. Now, they throw out a caution for no reason several times a race to "make it more interesting." Many fans have just given up on the whole mess.
-
As far as advertising F1 still probably reaches more fans
worldwide for any sporting event. Don't know what would be second.
I think you'll find Football (Soccer to you yanks) is miles ahead of F1 reaching fans worldwide Dare. Take just the English Premier league for example, which is the top rated by TV viewing in the world, and they have a reputed audience of 4 billion - yup 4 billion! :o
A study in the Times has revealed that less than a third of players who started in the Premier League at the weekend were English, "fuelling the FA’s concerns about a lack of opportunities for home-grown youngsters."
But the flip side to the debate is that the Premier League’s international popularity and profile is greater than ever before, with players of 64 nationalities now represented in England’s top flight for 2015-16 and with TV audiences of more than four billion fans watching per weekend.
The Premier League is now a truly global competition, in terms of player nationality, manager nationality, club ownership, sponsorship, TV rights and official team fan clubs around the world, as highlighted in a new in-depth study by Ticketbis.net.
Courtesy Eurosport.co.uk.
By comparison F1 pulls in over 400 million.
Official figures from Formula One Management indicate television audiences fell to above 400 million last year, further illustrating the sport’s declining popularity.
The new data means F1 has lost one-third of its worldwide audience since 2008 – around 200 million viewers. How many of those are now watching the sport via other means, legal or not, is unclear. The sport has drawn criticism for moving away from free-to-air broadcasts in favour of pay television deals.
Courtesy Keith Collantine F1fantic.co.uk 20th April 2016
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/04/20/f1-has-lost-one-third-of-its-tv-audience-since-2008/
-
I wonder how many people streaming F1 are included in the TV numbers or if at all?
I don't know about others on here but its only since I became semi retired and then fully retired that I have been able to go to races around once a year but there has to be some value for money and Monaco I believe does not give that due to cost and limited views.
-
Monaco used to be a great race, but modern aero dependant race cars and changes to the track have pretty well killed that. It survives on glamour and memories.
-
I honestly think that when Renault pulled out in the 90s it really put the sport into a tail spin that it really hasn't corrected from. (Certainly Renault didn't cause it, but rather their reasons for pulling out have never been truly addressed)
I'm confused. Renault didn't have a team in the 1990s. Are you referring to when they pulled out as an engine supplier at the end of 1997?
-
I honestly think that when Renault pulled out in the 90s it really put the sport into a tail spin that it really hasn't corrected from. (Certainly Renault didn't cause it, but rather their reasons for pulling out have never been truly addressed)
I'm confused. Renault didn't have a team in the 1990s. Are you referring to when they pulled out as an engine supplier at the end of 1997?
Yes, I am
-
Thanks for the clarification.
How did Renault's withdrawal send Formula 1 into a tailspin? They came back as an engine supplier in 2001 and a team the year after, so they were not absent for long and continued to supply teams with Mechachrome and Supertec customer engines.
-
Canadian F1 coverage is tucked away at 8 am on one of dozens of sports channels with no advertizing or significant coverage/promotion. Even the Canadian GP comes and goes without a blip outside of Montreal. There is no Canadian produced coverage at all. When I started watch F1 in the 90s it was presented on CBC: i.e., free over the air. When Villeneuve became involved the rights were bought by a cable channel which used to produce their own pre race show (it was pretty bad, except for segments with Gerald Donaldson, but it was something).
With that said, IndyCar is in a much more sorry state in Canada. We just had the Toronto Indy yesterday and... I forgot about it.
-
NASCAR is in even worse shape here in the States. One of the major broadcast networks, NBC, has the rights to the series for the 2nd half of the season. Of 14 remaining races, only 4 will be on the broadcast network. The rest will be on their 2nd tier cable channel. The Kentucky race a couple of weeks ago was a prime time Saturday night race. It was bumped to cable. The broadcast network had on a children's amateur talent contest.
-
Thanks for the clarification.
How did Renault's withdrawal send Formula 1 into a tailspin? They came back as an engine supplier in 2001 and a team the year after, so they were not absent for long and continued to supply teams with Mechachrome and Supertec customer engines.
Renault left the sport because the return on investment was shrinking. They only returned once F1 had put in 'cost cutting' measures. The cost cutting measures are intended to allow smaller teams to compete with bigger ones by preventing the big teams unlimited testing and unlimited R&D.
I think the gap between 'big' and 'small' teams is the biggest it's been since Concorde required only 'serious' F1 teams compete.
I think that lack of R&D, the lack of opportunity for weaker teams to get better without simply spending an insane amount of money. They're not new problems, but enough people who would invest in F1 are aware of them that it's hard to find anyone willing to invest. If Mercedes is winning and not getting anything out of it, and Petronas has their name on the winning car and isn't getting anything out of it... surely other investors/advertisers will come to the same conclusion.
I'd love to see the sport be dominated by privateers who love autoracing, but for every Williams and Brawn, we get Mallya and Branson who just can't help slapping their brand on anything 'glamorous'.
-
I agree with all of that, except that Renault isn't responsible for the mess that Formula 1 finds itself as a result of manufacturer dominance. The manufacturers collectively are responsible for this.