GPDA statement

[Londoner]

The Grand Prix Drivers Association, chaired by Jenson Button, Sebastian Vettel and Alex Wurz, have released this letter today about the current state of F1.



Pretty interesting criticism. Discuss.

[FullMetalJack]

Aaaaand in the wake of this open letter, there's a further shift in the TV the media landscape.

And it's not good

[Londoner]

Aaaaand in the wake of this open letter, there's a further shift in the TV the media landscape.

And it's not good

To be honest, I'm surprised it took that long for Sky to demand an exclusive deal.

Ah well, BTCC is about to become the most-watched motorsport series in the UK. There's silver in every cloud.

[Wallio]

The Grand Prix Drivers Association, chaired by Jenson Button, Sebastian Vettel and Alex Wurz, have released this letter today about the current state of F1.



Pretty interesting criticism. Discuss.

"I don't know what all the fuss is about. We'll all complain and bind right up until the start time and then we'll go out and race as usual. We've come all this way and the race is all set up. Track surface or no track surface, you know as well as I do, we'll race." - Keke Rosberg, 1984 Dallas GP

I love that quote. It applies to any type of racing series, and any particular situation (the track surface being the one in '84). Drivers will always drive. And if one doesn't want to, 5 others are willing to step in. Whether it be F1, all the way down to the grassroots drag racing I love so dearly. If myself (Or Button et al, in this case) don't like the direction, that's fine But they will still race. Or they will find themselves out of work.

[mario]

Aaaaand in the wake of this open letter, there's a further shift in the TV the media landscape.

And it's not good

To be honest, I'm surprised it took that long for Sky to demand an exclusive deal.

Ah well, BTCC is about to become the most-watched motorsport series in the UK. There's silver in every cloud.

With regards to the deal with Sky, is it necessarily the case that Sky actually demanded a contract for exclusive coverage from the start? Or was it really the case that the free to air broadcasters withdrew from the bidding, effectively giving Sky exclusive coverage by default? The way in which some parties have reported it, where they talk about Channel 4 not renewing their contract beyond 2018, makes it sound as if they chose not to bid in the first place.

[Paul Hayes]

I'm lucky enough to be able to afford to have Sky Sports F1, but I have it because I became an F1 fan watching free-to-air broadcasts. If you go down this route, it surely cuts off the potential of attracting new fans to the sport. Nobody will, as I did at the age of 11, happen to chance across a live race on television and become hooked.

[CoopsII]

Ah well, we always knew it was going to happen but even I'm surprised its this quickly. Still, whatchagonnado? Buy SKY? Hah! Stop watching F1? Looks like.

I'll miss this place too.

[UncreativeUsername37]

"F1 should be home only to the best teams, drivers"

Wait, wait, wait! What? Not only is this like a useless online petition without even any signatures, it doesn't even agree with us!

[Collieafc]

In all seriousness, I think its a well written letter - it makes the point without reaching for barbs and if anything I get the feeling at least the drivers are by and large still in touch with the fanbase. It comes across as basically saying "Stop arguing and get with the times or you wont have any sport left to argue about" in the same manner of who owned Forti. Or maybe I am just naive

As for the Sky deal, just wait for the viewership to plummet - thats timed almost to perfection at what the drivers are saying about the new generation of fans. F1 is using a 90s business model in 2016

[Fetzie]

Aaaaand in the wake of this open letter, there's a further shift in the TV the media landscape.

And it's not good

To be honest, I'm surprised it took that long for Sky to demand an exclusive deal.

Ah well, BTCC is about to become the most-watched motorsport series in the UK. There's silver in every cloud.

Apparently there'll be a "free-to-air" highlights show for all the races, and the British GP and qualifying session will also be free to air. I guess that's how they got around the stipulation that there has to be some free access to the broadcasts.

[AndreaModa]

Sky's figures for Australia were 30% down on last year. The slide is already well underway.

Note also how Sky's website makes no reference to the GPDA statement. No coverage whatsoever, not even on Twitter. Assuming interest drops even more and mainstream outlets like the BBC cut their coverage even further, then it won't matter what the drivers think because no one will hear about it!

[Peteroli34]

Apparently there'll be a "free-to-air" highlights show for all the races, and the British GP and qualifying session will also be free to air. I guess that's how they got around the stipulation that there has to be some free access to the broadcasts.

I dont believe that there is a stipulation that says F1 has to have free access to the broadcasts. its not on OFCOMS list so legally they dont have to give any coverage free to air in the UK.

[AndreaModa]

Apparently there'll be a "free-to-air" highlights show for all the races, and the British GP and qualifying session will also be free to air. I guess that's how they got around the stipulation that there has to be some free access to the broadcasts.

I dont believe that there is a stipulation that says F1 has to have free access to the broadcasts. its not on OFCOMS list so legally they dont have to give any coverage free to air in the UK.

The British GP was one of those 'protected events' that must be on FTA. Not sure if it's been altered recently, but it was certainly still the case when Sky first got involved in 2012, hence why that race has always been live on FTA, regardless of picks.

[Paul Hayes]

The British GP was one of those 'protected events' that must be on FTA. Not sure if it's been altered recently, but it was certainly still the case when Sky first got involved in 2012, hence why that race has always been live on FTA, regardless of picks.

This is incorrect - the British Grand Prix has never been on Ofcom's list of protected events, either for live or highlights coverage. Nor has any other F1 race.

[DanielPT]

Don't you worry guys. F1 will be back in free-to-air TV someday like it did in Portugal. It must run its cycle before coming back. Although it might be a bit harder for you than it was for us (And it took some 10 years or so for it to happen). The pay-per-view channel that used to air F1 in Portugal is undergoing a bit of a financial pickle (only football made it viable and barely) and had to let go some stuff F1 included. I am very much enjoying it on Portuguese Eurosport! Although it is a bit comical having F1 in Eurosport 2 while WTCC is on Eurosport 1, but I guess the 1 will transmit for all Europe the same while 2 will have more specific events for that country.

As for the GPDA letter, it is all echoing fans desperation. And everybody who loves the sport and it is not involved in any of the decision making entity. Unfortunately they way things are, it is pretty much looked and nobody will want to move an inch under the threat of the other side winning more leverage and power. Unless other major power comes along with authority telling FIA to rule the sport, FOM to take care of commercial side and teams to shut up and race (looking at you EU).

[CoopsII]

Don't you worry guys. F1 will be back in free-to-air TV someday like it did in Portugal.

I'm not so sure. The only thing likely to get it back for the next generation of viewers is if a terrestrial TV company suddenly had the amount of money to outbid SKY and by then probably other competitors like BT. Which is incredibly unlikely as money for terrestrial TV station will only become more scarce as people increase watching programming on other, ironically, pay per view things like Amazon and Netflix.

[Wallio]

I must say, as an outsider (read, American), I find this all very odd. Is cable that rare in the EU? I don't have cable myself, but I am in the EXTREME minority over here. My friends enjoy ribbing me about it, and my parents, who watch very little non-news TV honestly, still the huge cable package I convinced them to get when I lived at home so I could get Speedvision (RIP). They have something like 200+ channels. This is pretty much the norm here. Is cable that rare across the pond? During my trips to Europe I didn't watch much TV, but I seem to recall the hotels having loads of channels......

[DanielPT]

Don't you worry guys. F1 will be back in free-to-air TV someday like it did in Portugal.

I'm not so sure. The only thing likely to get it back for the next generation of viewers is if a terrestrial TV company suddenly had the amount of money to outbid SKY and by then probably other competitors like BT. Which is incredibly unlikely as money for terrestrial TV station will only become more scarce as people increase watching programming on other, ironically, pay per view things like Amazon and Netflix.

That is not what happened in Portugal either. What I am getting at is the real possibility that, with the dwindling audience numbers, the product F1 becomes a financial burden on the company like it did in Portugal. In that case, when you are paying over the odds for little you will arrive eventually at a point where you drop it altogether for it to regain popularity elsewhere before buying again or just for it to go bust alone. That seems to be the cycle in F1. Unlike Premier League where the viewership numbers keep raising which will only further increase its value . Of course this whole cycle takes a bit longer when you have national interest on the sport.

I must say, as an outsider (read, American), I find this all very odd. Is cable that rare in the EU? I don't have cable myself, but I am in the EXTREME minority over here. My friends enjoy ribbing me about it, and my parents, who watch very little non-news TV honestly, still the huge cable package I convinced them to get when I lived at home so I could get Speedvision (RIP). They have something like 200+ channels. This is pretty much the norm here. Is cable that rare across the pond? During my trips to Europe I didn't watch much TV, but I seem to recall the hotels having loads of channels......

We do. Except that in many case you must double what you are already paying for cable in order to have only the F1 channel unscrambled.

[Rob Dylan]

In Britainland we get 'Freeview' television, which is something like 50-100 channels, which are all free to watch. However, there a couple of 'Cable' companies (for lack of a better word) like Sky which give you a couple of hundred more channels, which between them pretty much have everything on them.

The thing is, Sky and other subscriptions are monthly and quite expensive, and unless you're a regular TV watcher (which I am not), you have to justify the cost to yourself. I am a student myself, and you would never find a student with Sky television. It's something of a luxury over here.

EDIT: When I say Freeview is free to watch, you 'have' to pay the BBC licence fee.

[Wallio]

We do. Except that in many case you must double what you are already paying for cable in order to have only the F1 channel unscrambled.

That seems.....counterproductive to say the least.

[Wallio]

In Britainland we get 'Freeview' television, which is something like 50-100 channels, which are all free to watch. However, there a couple of 'Cable' companies (for lack of a better word) like Sky which give you a couple of hundred more channels, which between them pretty much have everything on them.

The thing is, Sky and other subscriptions are monthly and quite expensive, and unless you're a regular TV watcher (which I am not), you have to justify the cost to yourself. I am a student myself, and you would never find a student with Sky television. It's something of a luxury over here.

EDIT: When I say Freeview is free to watch, you 'have' to pay the BBC licence fee.

50-100? That's not bad, I'll pay a license fee for that. Over here we get bupkiss on FTA TV. When I was growing up, cable was a luxury my parents couldn't justify, so we had THREE Stations. Well, 4, but FOX was brand new and had terrible reception. When I turned 17, we got DirecTV and briefy, as part of a promotion, received all 900 or so channels they offered. My parents then "paired it down" to about 250 or so. In my house I do not have cable but now we get 23 channels, but 4 of those are PBS, 4 are QVC, and 4 are Christian channels, so really its 11. Not that it matters as all I watch is Lucifier, Gotham, the NFL and NASCAR really.

[dr-baker]

The thing is, Sky and other subscriptions are monthly and quite expensive, and unless you're a regular TV watcher (which I am not), you have to justify the cost to yourself. I am a student myself, and you would never find a student with Sky television. It's something of a luxury over here.

Although it's not uncommon for students to use their parents' Sky Go package...

[Rob Dylan]

Well, 50-100 is a lot of channels, but that does not mean they show anything of any quality. Half of the channels are like jewellery selling shows, or showing constant repeats of terrible panel shows, or adult channels that only come on after midnight or whatever. But that's television I suppose.

Half of the channels are just expansions of the original 5 channels Britain used to have before. For example, the BBC has gone from BBC1 and BBC2, to BBC3, BBC4, BBC News 24, BBC Parliament, CBBC (childrens'), CBeebies (small childrens'). ITV now has ITV2, ITV3, ITV4, some of those with "+1" channels that show everything an hour later. Channel 4, More4, you get the idea.

[IceG]

Wallio, you dismiss the 4 PBS channels in your post.

In the UK the PBS channels include the BBC (smugly sips cup of tea with little finger at 45 degrees) and Channel 4 (a bit more adventurous - we once had a kiss between two women stop the nation in its tracks). Those are the channels which provided (BBC) and will provide for the next two years (Ch4) our limited F1 coverage.

I have the Sky satellite service and am lucky to get F1 in HD included without paying for the full sport package. When they change that I will have to pay £10-£20/month more to watch F1 and a bunch of other sports which have no interest for me (cricket, soccer, golf, etc.). Or, I won't because the F1 product is not worth it. If I want to watch MotoGP as well I would have to pay another £10 to another content provider (BT) - that ain't happening either.

[Wallio]

Wallio, you dismiss the 4 PBS channels in your post.

Well to be fair, I do enjoy Masterpiece Theater and Curious George, but that doesn't justify PBS expanding to FOUR channels all because of homemakers fawning over "Downton Abbey".

[AndreaModa]

The British GP was one of those 'protected events' that must be on FTA. Not sure if it's been altered recently, but it was certainly still the case when Sky first got involved in 2012, hence why that race has always been live on FTA, regardless of picks.

This is incorrect - the British Grand Prix has never been on Ofcom's list of protected events, either for live or highlights coverage. Nor has any other F1 race.

Well how about that! My apologies, I'd always assumed it was for some reason. Ah well!

[Fetzie]

The British GP was one of those 'protected events' that must be on FTA. Not sure if it's been altered recently, but it was certainly still the case when Sky first got involved in 2012, hence why that race has always been live on FTA, regardless of picks.

This is incorrect - the British Grand Prix has never been on Ofcom's list of protected events, either for live or highlights coverage. Nor has any other F1 race.

Well how about that! My apologies, I'd always assumed it was for some reason. Ah well!

Wasn't the stipulation that F1 content has to be broadcast FTA in the Concorde Agreement?

[dr-baker]

This is incorrect - the British Grand Prix has never been on Ofcom's list of protected events, either for live or highlights coverage. Nor has any other F1 race.

Well how about that! My apologies, I'd always assumed it was for some reason. Ah well!

Wasn't the stipulation that F1 content has to be broadcast FTA in the Concorde Agreement?

Well, it would certainly affect the sponsorship packages that the teams could attract if it were not on free-to-air...

[AndreaModa]

Wasn't the stipulation that F1 content has to be broadcast FTA in the Concorde Agreement?

Well, it would certainly affect the sponsorship packages that the teams could attract if it were not on free-to-air...

That might have been where I heard about it originally, but I honestly can't say for sure.

I said somewhere else though that perhaps there's a growing realisation in F1, and in motorsport in general, which is massively more reliant on sponsorship than any other sport, that the old sponsorship models are dead in the water in the 21st Century. Is it the case that there's so few companies out there now willing to put up the big bucks to put their name on the side of a car and get some promotional material, that the money offered from Sky, rumoured to be £1 billion for the six years, is a better prospect? Quite momentous if that is the case, but it wouldn't be entirely surprising in my eyes.

Of course the obvious solution to that problem would be a strict cost cap, oh, just like the one thrown about in 2009...

[Londoner]

Controversial Jacques sticks his neck on the line once again

You could almost imagine JV being the only driver to side with FISA and Balestre over superlicences during the driver's strilke at Kyalami in 1982...

[dinizintheoven]

You know how one of the rules of the internet is "never read the comments"? For once, that rule can be broken.

Jacques Villeneuve - motorsport's very own Dunning-Kruger victim. Maybe he should shut up after his own "noteworthy" performances like getting beat by Damon Hill, beat regularly by Schumi in a Ferrari that was 2-seconds a lap slower than the Williams reliable-rocketship of 1997, beat by Zonta, spanked by Panis, coudn't see which way Button went, outpaced then replaced by Sato (a pay driver ffs!), couldn't finish on the lead lap in a Renault that Alonso won the championship with, (although he qualified well) he was the slowest race driver for Peugeot at Le Mans so they dumped him, couldn't hold a sponsor in NASCAR, and willfully destroyed virtually the entire field in Aussie V8's in the first corner of his first race at the Gold Coast and was immediately banned from that series.

Dunning-Kruger is the effect that dumb people don't know that they are dumb, and so act and speak with total confidence, while smart people can't believe they find difficult tasks easy, so they they think they've missed important aspects (which they haven't) and so tend to appear doubtful. Cornell psychology researchers Dunning and Kruger started this research after learning about MacArthur Wheeler, who used lemon juice (invisible ink!) on his face while robbing a bank, was found guilty on video evidence of his face, served his time, then got out, got lemon juice, and did it all again...

JV Quotes:
"You run into each other, that's racing" didn't stop him protesting Schumi in 1997.

"It's sad you don't see drivers being real people" except when they love F1 and want to save it, obviously.

"People in NASCAR show me respect" (I think what Bubba is showing you ain't respect, boy...)

"I don't like people telling me what to do" ... but he doesn't mind the other way round, eh?

"Everything bad about France was transferred to Quebec" leaving all the good stuff behind, like the Route Napoleon, Provence, the south coast, etc etc ...

None of this is any reflection on his father Gilles, who was neither confidently dumb nor doubtful. Gilles had the right approach to life - push the boundaries to discover the actual truth, then use that knowledge properly. He drove faster than the car could take, then used the start point of the crashes as physical evidence of where the limit was, then drove exactly on that limit. We now have computers to find that limit, but they wouldn't have the required data without drivers like Gilles.

[Yannick]

Controversial Jacques sticks his neck on the line once again

You could almost imagine JV being the only driver to side with FISA and Balestre over superlicences during the driver's strilke at Kyalami in 1982...

The headline is awkwardly funny in a self-referential kind of way, as it goes "Jaqcues Villeneuve says F1 drivers should shut up", given the fact that he is best known to most as a former F1 driver who many also feel should shut up.

Then again, I don't mind JV being opinionated because often, these are things somebody must say, no matter if you like them or not.

My guess is the F1 drivers currently speak out against the experimentation with the qualifying format because it is both in the right interest of the teams and the commercial rights holder. Jacques as a driver would not want to let his own voice be instrumentalized in this way by other players in the political game that is F1, wouldn't he? If that's what he means, then why doesn't he say so? In the end, he is just offering his own advice, which brings us back to the self-referential part mentioned above.

To be honest, I've never been much of a Jacques fan whilst he was in F1, and it was not easy to cheer for him at first when my favourite team Sauber chose him as their driver back in the day. Yet, much later, I've come to admire his creativity in coming up with unique setup options (his overtake on Schumacher round the outside of Estoril's parabolica which only was possible due to an oval setup on the car) or psychological options (his title-winning divebomb on Schumacher from far back at Jerez when he correctly judged the outcry which would happen if there were to occur a block that leads to a crash AND if there were avoiding action by Schumacher if he avoided a crash).
Yet, to play these kind of high-end tricks which are his speciality in a way that is visible to the public, he needed good cars and to be on a good team. He never had that anymore after 1998. His comeback at Indianapolis in 2014 when he finished on the lead lap after about 20 years out of the sport was nothing short of impressive to this observer.

[MorbidelliObese]

While never a fan when he was driving, I must admit to having more time for Villeneuve in recent years, partly because while he can't keep his mouth shut, when it is open I tend to agree with the majority of what he says.

This whole "F1 drivers need to shut up... now listen what I have to say" did seem a bit weird, but even then he manages to stumble upon saying something I couldn't have put better myself later on.

Villeneuve believes F1 must stop changing its rules in the pursuit of improving the show, noting that – like all sports – it cannot always be exciting.

"They should stop changing the rules," he said. "In all the noble sports like tennis and football, the rules haven't changed in 100 years, even when it is boring, and people respect it."

He may be strictly speaking wrong there in that in football at least various small rule tweaks have happened down the years - mostly around the offside rule, but I do like the fact that if I watch a match and it finishes 0-0 then commentators, pundits, fans, whoever won't be moaning about how shite the sport is and that we need to change everything.

[UncreativeUsername37]

He may be strictly speaking wrong there in that in football at least various small rule tweaks have happened down the years - mostly around the offside rule, but I do like the fact that if I watch a match and it finishes 0-0 then commentators, pundits, fans, whoever won't be moaning about how shite the sport is and that we need to change everything.

The back-pass rule ruined the entire spirit of football. I gave it a chance, but I just couldn't watch anymore.
That was a joke

[Dj_bereta]

Looks like Watson agrees with Villeneuve.

[DanielPT]

He may be strictly speaking wrong there in that in football at least various small rule tweaks have happened down the years - mostly around the offside rule, but I do like the fact that if I watch a match and it finishes 0-0 then commentators, pundits, fans, whoever won't be moaning about how shite the sport is and that we need to change everything.

I think it gets worst in football that in F1 in my perspective. As for in F1, the rare victory for the underdog people rave on about that amazing feat and that race is marked as exciting.

In football people get annoyed at the interference from the underdogs in the middle of the same team. This is a view reflected by pundits and commentators and you need to not go much further as this season to look at how its been with them moaning about a Wolfsburg-Gent or Benfica-Zenit ties that no one wants to see.

As for the 0-0 results people have been complaining more and more about the 'weak' performances in the world cup compared with champions league football, but I quite like it because of its history and because it is still one of the most important competitions in sport where you can still raise a generation of great players and not see them picked one by one by wealthier clubs. Which means more money doesn't directly equalizes to success.