I've updated my BBC commercial - now with classical music as suggested and it's shorter so it's more tense. (or... should be )

What do you guys think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za5y6njukEs...e=youtube_gdata

Thanks in advance

Licence fee, BBC Worldwide (commercial arm), Government grants.


Good to hear the BBC have given Legard the chop. Not too sure about Coulthard though, he seems a little too placid to be a commentator?

Correct £200m is the fee BBC pay to Formula One Management. This works out at £40m a season. In comparison, the Six Nations contract is £40m a year, while the Premiership contract is £56m a year.

Anyone got a link of Legard on MOTD Last night?

I've no idea whom Crazy Ninja was hearing, but it wasn't Jonathan Legard.

£40 quid a year for those peanut hugging, egg chasers?
Way too much.
Jp

Oohh! Beat me to it!

Woops, my bad.

Is the £56m prem contract just for the highlights they show on MOTD? If so they are getting the F1 races, qually and practices for peanuts!

Yes.

I wonder what we will see sneaking on to our screens next year.... Formula 1 Sponsored by Red Bull!? Or Jake ipad Humphrey!? I know it won't be that extreme ... We'll have to wait and see...

Thats an obscene amount of money for very little, i dont expect MOTD gets particualy good viewing figures either

3.5m to 4m on Saturday's; anything from 2m to 3m on Sunday's, depending on the games and the results of course.

£200m of public money going to a sport which is exclusively for only the very wealthy. In the grand scheme of things I think it's pretty damn disgusting.

So the obscene amount wasted on MOTD is better value, £ for £ to the state broadcasting corporation funded by a direct tax than the obsene amount wasted on F1?? ... or does the £200m include redundant 5Live coverage and little viewed (outside the hardcore) internet rebroadcasts. [Edit: Just seen that its £200m over 5 years for F1... hope I've got this right now].

And since I'm in this mood... I love the irony of the socialism inspired BBC paying big money to effectively broadcast adverts by giant corporations at the same time that it eschews running adverts to recoup any of its costs.... you couldnt make this up. [Edit: Its less obscene but no less ironic (in the American sense of the word) IMO].

Pfft. You could say that about costume drama, opera, the Olympics, Question Time...

I, for one, would much rather those millions of public money went towards paying past it "celebrities" ridiculous amounts to appear on stupid dancing shows to relaunch their careers and earn more money for themselves.

Oh wait....

If the BBC also pay £40m for the Six Nations and £56m for the English Premier League highlights then it looks like F1 is value for money in comparison: it generates more TV hours than Six Nations and generates more viewers than EPL highlights.

It's not really a sport for the wealthy. Most people in the paddock aren't wealthy, nor are most fans.

F1 is owned by the wealthy, but that's a different thing.

In the grand scheme of things, as far as the BBC is concerned viewing figures are all that matter. That is what makes the decision and F1 is getting the viewing figures to justify the money spent.

If people like the sport and are not wealthy, should they be denied access to it?

Seriously, does it matter whether it is £40m or £1m per annum... does no one see the inanity of the public paying via BBC fees for a product that the same companies (and others) that are prepared to shell out on F1 advertising would only too happily pay the BBC to broadcast.... all you'd need to do is watch a few adverts.

The only reason why anyone would object to this is because you've already got to pay compulsory BBC fee - so you dont mind seeing it spent on F1 (especially as opposed to dancing with the stars or simlar shows). But if the fee was voluntary, how many would pay it in order to avoid adverts during the boring sections of F1 races? Instead, you'd be annoyed at paying anything when you could easily have it for free with adverts.

I mean, is there anyone who sends the BBC extra money when they think it is doing a good job??


... didnt think so.

I don't care what they pay for it as long as we get to see it anyway,... and into the bargain get good coverage at that, which to date we do. Without ads. Hell, we have to pay the license anyway, I can't think of much else I'd rather it be spent on....

You realise for that money, they get those figures 38 weeks a year, twice a week? For F1 they get their viewers 17 times a year.

Product placement is allowed on the BBC from next year...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12038707

Edit..

Doesn't say beeb, just TV...!?

I'd certainly pay not to have adverts.

Same as we pay not to have adverts in all the other programming.

How much is it anyway...if 4m people watch, it costs £10 per year each. 50p per race weekend.

Same here.

But the licence fee doesn't just go to the BBC, all free channels including ITV get a cut. So when we had to endure the adverts on ITV, some of it was still coming out of the licence fee. It is a tax, but it is specifically directed towards tv and radio. This is why you have to have one to own a radio, tv or even have access to the internet. If we didn't have the fee then it would be cable or satellite which is at a cost but would mean adverts as they are profit making organisations.

To be honest, at home we have Sky, yet the channels we view the most are the BBC channels.

Part of the deal was to provide better coverage than ITV. Next season we will get 200 + hours of coverage for that £40m, works out at about £50k per hour. Compare it to some other shows on the BBC. I appreciate you have to factor in salaries and travel arrangements, but how expensive is it compared to other shows? It probably balances out, in fact it might be one of the cheaper shows to air for all we know. Give an example, say they paid £3m for 12 episodes of the Tudors, that is £250k per hour with probably on average 2m viewers. Which is cheaper?

And me.

I could have swore it was him doing the Fulham match? Though i have been drunk and ill so its a definite possibility im wrong

Edit: You're right D.M.M. i haven't a clue where i got The Leg doing MOTD from

Makes sense really.. every show is 'sponsored by' these days. Well all except on BBC. I imagine this will mean Simon Cowell will be drinking Coca Cola on X Factor next year.

What has the wealth of the participants got anything to do with how much the rights cost?

It's money well spent when you see the wages of the BBC execs and that we don't have to watch any adverts during broadcast.

The F1 takes up way more airtime than the Football and Six Nations, however the Premiership contract is obviously the most important to the BBC.

F1 gets 3 hours 19 times (race) & 2 hours 19 times (quali). A lot of airtime

The BBC licence fee goes a long way and we get coverage of some pretty minority stuff (e.g. BBC Scotland covering the curling championships for the viewing pleasure of a few thousand teuchters) so F1 is far from the most marginal part of their coverage.

Did anyone notice the MB/DC rumours breaking into the mainstream in a Daily Mail article yesterday? Can't be long before the BBC makes its own announcement. According to the Mail (a hopeless, worthless POS 'newspaper' IMO) Brundle will continue with the grid walk as well as being the main commentator. Some breathless starts to races then, when the box is a good distance from the start/finish line

Are you sure about that? Final score, football focus and MOTD every Saturday must be a fair few hours of coverage. Not saying you're wrong just didn't think it was such a huge difference.

Plainly not true.

Plus another 4 hrs per race for the practice sessions on the red button

Final score is just reading out results and annoying the nation with Garth "the tit"Crooks, surely that isnt included in what they pay for the prem rights?!

Completely wrong sorry. You are supposed to have one if you use a device to watch live television as it is being broadcast.

You don't need a licence to own a television, radio or use the internet.

You need a TV license if you're accessing BBC footage via the internet.

TV Licensing says

Only live broadcasts. You don't need a license to watch iPlayer or any other videos on the BBC website.

Final Score and Football Focus would not come under the Premiership highlights contract, the BBC would still be able to broadcast both of those programmes if they wanted to (albeit of a reduced scale). Those 2 programmes are not affected by whether BBC have the Premiership contract or not.

In the same with, the BBC Radio 5 Live coverage would not be affected if F1 returned to ITV.
-----
EDIT: This is something I put ages ago on Digital Spy Forums which I'll copy here:

MATCH OF THE DAY
Premiership rights, would be over 38 weekends. And each weekend has, say 2 hours 15 minutes of programming (1 hour 15 minutes of MOTD and 1 hour of MOTD2). I'm not factoring in mid-week games here. So 5,130 minutes of "action" in total. (its not really that much though as MOTD2 does not happen on any mid-week games)

£56,000,000 divided by 5,130 minutes == £10,916 per minute.

SIX NATIONS
Over 5 weeks, 7 hours 30 minutes of programming (2 hours 30 minutes for each game, including pre and post match discussion, but excluding Red Button Forum). So 2,250 minutes of "action" in total.

£40,000,000 divided by 2,250 minutes == £17,777 per minute

FORMULA 1
Depends on the amount of race weekends per year. Last year had 17 races, this year had 19 races. The more races you have, the more 'efficient' the rights come one could argue. For this comparison, I'll use 17 races. Per weekend on BBC TV (excluding Red Button extras), you have 305 minutes of coverage. That's also excluding highlight programmes and re-runs for Asian races. So 5,185 minutes of "action" in total.

£40,000,000 divided by 5,185 minutes == £7,714 per minute

If we were to do it for 19 races == £40,000,000 divided by 5,795 minutes == £6,902 per minute

So, in order:

1) £6,902 per minute = F1
2) £10,916 per minute = MOTD
3) £17,777 per minute = Six Nations

I have zero idea how accurate the above is, seeing as a lot of it is guesstimates, but out of the 'big 3', it seems like F1 is the most efficient for BBC to keep. And Six Nations, one could argue, is massively overspent on, if the above figures are right.

If the rights were £30m for Six Nations, it'd be £13,333 per minute - which is still more than MOTD and the F1. Go down to £20m, it'd be £8,888 per minute - which is still more than F1.

F1 gets around 4m for most races, MOTD gets a similar number and Six Nations varies depending on country. Anyone have different calculations to throw out?

(and for those that say that F1 is expensive might want to think again...)
-----
Plus, F1 has a lot more Red Button extras than Six Nations and MOTD.

For all those moaning how much F1 coverage costs, would you prefer that:

1) The BBC drop it and we have no coverage at all ?

or

2) The BBC drop it, Sky pick it up and charge you £20 per race to watch, with lots of adverts and sponsorship being rammed down your throat every two minutes ? The amount of coverage drops and they don't employ presenters/commentators that really know much about the sport.

or

3) Leave the coverage alone, with live practice on the red button, live qualifying, a decent bit of pre and post race coverage and the forum on the red button, all for no extra cost than you pay right now, with no adverts or sponsorship ?

From the horses mouth...

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-...echnology-top8/

The license fee is unchanged by whether F1 is there. They'd just spend that 40mil a year on something else.

So hypothetically you don't need one, but realistically you do.

When I was a kid in the early 80's, our tv broke and we couldn't afford a new one. It took 3 months for my parents to save up for a new one. We had to go to my grandmothers house to watch tv. During that time we were hounded as to why we didn't have a licence. They would come round the house and search for a working tv. Of course they couldn't find one as there wasn't one. It was not nice.

Jp

you can tell them you dont watch live tv broadcasts and you dont need a license and you will never be bothred, the vans could never detect if you had a tv that was recieving a broadcast either