The Daily Telegraph have this morning published an article written by Christian Sylt and Caroline Reid with the headline, and I quote “BBC saves £150m in Formula 1 deal with Sky”. How accurate is that? The answer is, not very much.
As I did with the Daily Mail article concerning Simon Lazenby here, and as I did with The Guardian article here, I will dissect the article. As always, there are some parts of the article which are true, and there are some which appears to prove that the writers have not done their research.
The first bug-bear for me is when the article claims that Sky Sports are paying £25 million for Formula 1 and BBC are paying £7 million. Both figures look low, especially when you consider that the figure totals £32 million. Let us go back to 2008. According to Ofcom, between 1997 and 2001, ITV paid £14 million per year for Formula 1. That increased to £19 million between 2002 and 2005, before increasing again (this time by £10 million) to £29 million between 2006 and 2010. Of course, they pulled out during 2008, with BBC taking over for 2009. Now, if you are suggesting that BBC did not pay substantially more than £29 million between 2009 and 2011, then I would be extremely shocked. £40 million was the amount I believed BBC to be paying, which is supported by a Google search with multiple level sources reporting the same amount.
So to suggest that BBC and Sky combined are paying £8 million less per year, is a bit optimistic. If anything, the £40 million amount would have risen somewhat, we all know how Bernie Ecclestone likes to increase the contract value at any given opportunity, hence why ITV’s Formula 1 contract went up by £10 million per year despite zero competition. I would have a stab and say Sky Sports are paying £40 million, with BBC paying £10 million. That saving, instead of it being £150 million, comes in at £210 million, a far bigger sum than that in the Daily Telegraph article. If BBC are paying £15 million, for sake of argument, then the saving is £175 million over seven years.
On the other side of the spectrum, the article claims that their was a “£480 annual cost of subscribing to Sky’s sports package”. That is an interesting way of putting things, which works out at £40 per month. The article makes out that £40 is the cheapest way to see Formula 1 on Sky. It is not. Keith Collantine of F1 Fanatic worked out that the cheapest annual cost is £363, while another member on that particular website worked out that if you just wanted to watch the ten Sky exclusive live races it via Sky Go on the computer, it would cost you £175. I would not class the £480 figure as an exaggeration, because it is true, but there are much cheaper ways of watching F1 on Sky than that sum.
“Across the eight Grands Prix which have taken place so far this year, the BBC’s total audience of viewers watching at least 15 minutes has fallen 20.5% to 20.2m which is understandable given that it lost half of the live races. In contrast, F1 has gained as it is understood that 5.5m watched at least 15 minutes of Sky’s broadcasts of the first eight races and this offset the BBC’s drop. In fact, the total audience for the race in Valencia was 8% up on 2011.”
I’m afraid that can only be described as spin. The figures quoted there as reach figures, and it is impossible for the reader to know how many of the 5.5 million are bundled into the 20.2 million figure. I’ve watched the majority of Sky’s programming, but also watched the British Grand Prix on BBC. Does that mean I am two people and therefore bundled into both sets of figures? With regards Valencia, the total audience was up, yes, but on the other hand Australia, Malaysia, Bahrain, Spain, Monaco, Canada and Britain were down. Only Valencia and China have recorded increases.
Finally, I’m afraid I do not believe the following is true:
“The deal suits F1 particularly since only a core of die-hard fans watch every race live in full.”
BBC’s viewing figures last year were the highest since 1999, both seasons averaging 4.55 million, which shows that not only die-hard fans were getting into watching every race live, but it was also drawing in a large proportion of casual fans. The lowest rated race last season was Belgium, which had 3.76 million viewers. This year, already four races have had under 3.76 million viewers, and this year looks set to be the lowest rated season since 2008…
Motorsport Broadcasting 