El Scorchio wrote: ↑29 Nov 2019, 15:52
Trouble for BBC is the way they are funded. (Licence fee and no ad or sponsorship revenue) They have to justify financial decisions and everyone interferes in it. The argument is 'is it in the public interest' to whack all the money on live sport- especially in this day and age where competition for all rights is so fierce. People complain and everyone sticks their oar in and it becomes a political point. And they do have a remit to spend the money on a wide range of things rather than all on sport.
Really their hands are tied as their paymasters will not allow them to realistically compete with subscription based broadcasters. It's truly sad the way sport has disappeared in the last couple of decades from terrestrial TV.
If there's any consolation at all, if you are prepared to pay for it, the pay broadcasters have taken coverage of most sports to fantastic new heights with the amount of money and resource they are able to sink into it. Cricket is the one that springs to mind first.
Then they should never have taken F1 on in the first place! If it had been left to the old process, FTA broadcasters would always have had first refusal as part of the bidding process. The BBC to Sky deal was done mid contract outside of the bidding process, so no other broadcasters got a look in.
For the first year in a very long time I didn't watch the majority of races live. Instead I just watched them on the C4 highlights coverage. The C4 team is actually fantastic, and I prefer it to Sky's coverage, but it's just a shame it's not live anymore. The later races I normally miss, the highlights often aren't broadcast until late evening and I have to leave early for work the next morning so I normally miss them all together.
I can imagine a lot of casual watchers aren't watching F1 anymore either, it's a shame but it's the decision they made so it's their problem if the viewing figures are bombing in the UK, the "home of F1".