Ecclestone threatens to drop Monza from calendar

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Podium Monza, 2013In the round-up: Bernie Ecclestone threatens not to renew Monza’s grand prix contract when it comes up for renewal in 2016.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Ecclestone saluta Monza “Bye bye dopo il 2016…” (La Gazzetta dello Sport, Italian)

Asked about the future of the race beyond the expiration of its current contract in 2016 Ecclestone said: “Not good. I don’t believe we’ll do another contract, as the old one was a disaster for us from a commercial point of view. So it’s bye-bye after 2016.” He also repeated his desire to see some of the smaller teams drop out of the sport and instead have eight teams of three cars.

Red Bull’s Christian Horner admits to two years’ worry about Renault engine (The Guardian)

“We sat down to express our concerns with Renault in Autumn 2012. They have got to get it together. They’re not in Formula One to make up the numbers.”

I’ve outperformed Vettel – Ricciardo (BBC)

“Did I think it would be 6-2 in qualifying and I would be leading him in the championship? Probably not.”

Formula E can challenge F1 – Heidfeld (ESPN)

“I cannot look into the future but of course with the technology behind it, if you tried to look into the future, Formula E looks like the place to be and the place to go.”

Lotus to switch to Merc engines (Joe Saward)

“The word on the street is that Lotus F1 Team, the old Renault F1 factory team, will shortly announce that it will become the fourth Mercedes team.”

FIA explains how restarts will work (Autosport)

“Team personnel who normally sit on the pit wall will have to move to the safety of the garages, with the exception of two people from each outfit.”

Renault nicht schuld an Vettel-Problem (Auto Motor und Sport, German)

Vettel’s power unit problem in Austria was caused by a software problem with the engine control unit which is standard to all teams.

Derek Warwick – Raw Racing (Mario Muth via YouTube)


Comment of the day

A little story about the celebrated battle between Gilles Villeneuve and Rene Arnoux which featured in yesterday’s round-up:

What I also loved about that duel was that afterwards Villeneuve and Arnoux went into a broadcaster’s tent and watched their battle replayed on tape, arm in arm, having a great laugh and a great time re-living what they too knew was special and was what racing can truly be.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Avegaille and Andy2286!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Juan Pablo Montoya started what turned out to be his last F1 race eight years ago today at Indianapolis. Having spent much of the intervening period in NASCAR he has returned to single-seater racing in IndyCar this year and claimed his best result of the year so far – second – in Houston on Saturday.

Image © Red Bull/Getty

Advert | Go Ad-free


122 comments on Ecclestone threatens to drop Monza from calendar

1 2 3
  1. Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:03

    I dare you.

    • Michael C said on 2nd July 2014, 1:26

      Bernie is crazy, we mustn’t ever tell him about Formula E’s “fan boost”.

    • hzh (@hzh00) said on 2nd July 2014, 2:48

      may be it is all about Vettel’s booing at Ferrari’s “home”.

    • Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 2nd July 2014, 3:27

      They can do whatever the heck they want… and they’ve been doing it.

    • karter22 (@karter22) said on 2nd July 2014, 4:58

      The old man is definitely losing it!

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 2nd July 2014, 7:13

      The man wants to be leading F1 in 2016… Jesus!

    • nidzovski (@nidzovski) said on 2nd July 2014, 10:23

      Maybe he will be dropped by 2016….

    • WilliamB (@william-brierty) said on 2nd July 2014, 16:40

      @vettel1 – The crucial word here is “threatens”. What we have here is a bluff from Mr Ecclestone, a casual attempt to suggest that F1 doesn’t need Monza, that it is not an untouchable race. In reality it is an untouchable race, a venue without which, and its like, that most would not watch F1. When it comes to writing a new contract Bernie often uses political statements like this to stack the odds in his favour, but I would still find it difficult to imagine a calendar without Monza. A diminishing Italian market is a poor excuse for global market impact that the removal of Monza would have, especially with the additions in Russia and Azerbaijan unlikely to offset that deficit, and confirms the fact that Bernie is after a better deal to redress the fall in Italian interest. Ultimately we have seen Silverstone, Spa and Montreal also threatened with a similar threat (the exclusion of Canada from the 2009 calendar is admittedly more than a threat), and yet the futures of all are secure, let’s hope the same will be true of Monza…

      • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 2nd July 2014, 23:05

        I imagine it will be @william-brierty, though perhaps with a renegotiated contract as I believe the lowest paying circuit currently on the calendar. There is a lot of commercial interest in the race for Ferrari, and we know very well how F1 bows down to protect Ferrari…

  2. Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:06

    Does Ecclestone know his days are up and now just want to drive this sport into the ground so no one else can benefit from it? Because that’s certainly how he’s acting like.

    • Spinmastermic (@spinmastermic) said on 2nd July 2014, 2:45

      He’s trying to up the price of the hosting fees. What he wants now is for Rome to try to organise a street race so there is a competing venue. Its all very calculated as usual.

      • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 2nd July 2014, 8:05

        Exactly. This is a standard Bernie-negotiating-gambit. It’s based on the pretence that Bernie doesn’t really want Monza at all and so later in the proceedings, he can be grudgingly persuaded to keep the race at Monza in exchange for a massive hike in fees.

      • DaveW (@dmw) said on 2nd July 2014, 15:06

        Yes, it’s part of his normal rope-a-dope. But Monza is not Turkey or Korea. This kind of talk is actually enraging to any fan. It’s almost like Indycar saying, we’ll drop the Indy 500 because of the fees. I’m no Tifoso, but this is like yelling fire in a crowded theater.

        One day soon we may be hearing these pronouncements from behind bullet-proof lexan in the visitors room of a fine German prison. That would be the proper context and setting for this nonsense anyway.

  3. Aimal (@aimalkhan) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:07

    hahaha good old Bernie. Always joking around. :/

  4. Graham (@guitargraham) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:07

    i thought monza was one of the protected races that bernie was allowed to drop

  5. Spencer Ward (@sward28) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:18

    I think it’s just as Keith mentions in one of his tweets. Does the pit infrastructure need to be re-done?

  6. faulty (@faulty) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:19

    Just how good was Horner as a racer, Jean Todt good (I know he wasn’t driving) or better?

  7. Ed Marques (@edmarques) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:20

    Bernie will be out of F1 before that.

  8. timi (@timi) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:35

    (UK) Minimum price to subscribe to Sky’s #F1 channel rises to £577: … And some people wonder why F1’s losing viewers…

    Thank you Keith! Hopefully this will go some way to lessening the complaints that it is the regulations and ‘noise’ that are causing the decline in viewers. Great to see someone out there with common sense!

    • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:38

      I still fail to understand why Sky do not do an F1 channel only subscription. There would potentially be a lot of F1 fans who would buy into that who simply have no interest in other sports to justify the cost of a full subscription.

      £200 a year would not be unduly unreasonable.

      • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:57

        Particularly since F1 is such a unique sport (partially the reason why it has its own channel on Sky).

        My family pay for a Sky Sports subscription and it does get well used for football and rugby in particular, but I feel I am not in the majority on that one.

      • Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:10

        £577 for one channel/package is asinine pricing. Here in the States, F1 is on NBCSN usually, and it’s behind a paywall. However, it’s included in most cable/satellite packages, the cheapest is like $25/month. Granted, we don’t get FP1, FP3 or much else in terms of extras, but we at least get Qualy and Race.

        I hate to say it, but if I had to pay $990 to watch F1, I’d NEVER do it.

        • Lateralus (@lateralus) said on 2nd July 2014, 2:29

          “Granted, we don’t get FP1, FP3 or much else in terms of extras, but we at least get Qualy and Race.”

          You get part of them. Maybe 75% or so. The other portion is commercial breaks. At least sometimes they give you side-by-side, but no audio and even on a giant HDTV, the video is so small you can’t see anything.

          NBC is insultingly bad. As a US-ian, I just torrent the sky feed and avoid F1 websites on grand prix weekends.

          • Wonderduck (@wonderduck) said on 2nd July 2014, 2:46

            I just torrent the sky feed

            Meanwhile, those of us with NBCSN (or CNBC this week) get to watch in HD on our 51″ big screen TVs while we sit in our nice comfy couches. Enjoy that laptop!

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 2nd July 2014, 3:27

            I think your estimate of 75% is to generous, my estimate is 66.6% ie. 1 minute of commercials for every 2 minutes of racing.

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 2nd July 2014, 6:48

            @wonderduck – did you know that modern TV sets have Wifi/Ethernet and you can just sit on that same couch and watch a HD stream on your 51″?

          • Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 2nd July 2014, 9:45

            @vettel1 – I guess it takes some of the pain away, but that’s still crazy pricing. $83/month for 6 channels… Don’t you also have to have a TV license or something arbitrary like that as well from the Gov’t?

          • Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 2nd July 2014, 9:53

            @lateralus – The Sky package is $990/year. That works out to $52.10 per race (assuming you only purchase it for F1, as a lot of people do). Now, we are talking legal means to watch F1 racing. Yes, it is possible to stream a Sky feed, or whatever you’d like, but that’s not the point here.

            Now figure, if you bought DirecTV’s cheapest package ($25/month) and ONLY watched F1, you pay $15.79/race. Is a reduced number of commercials, mildly better commentating and the ability to watch two extra FP sessions (which usually air between 12am-5am), really worth $36.31 per race more?

          • Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 2nd July 2014, 10:05

            @lateralus – I just double checked my numbers, and found out that they are all screwed up, because the lowest DTV package with NBCSN is $45, so ignore them please.

            That said though, my point still remains that $990 is a LOT of money to watch F1 every year, legally.

          • Dwight_js said on 2nd July 2014, 17:41


            I use a projector to watch high quality downloads – I get about a 70″ screen that way. Is it as sharp as an HD TV? No, but it’s pretty darn sharp, and at 10% of the cost, I’ll take my setup any day.

          • timi (@timi) said on 2nd July 2014, 19:30

            @braketurnaccelerate The cost of watching F1 on sky is because it is bundled into the sports package which is over 20 sports channel. You get most PL football games, almost every rubgy game, golf, every ATP tour. Simply put it is well worth the money if you’re into more than one sport. The problem is if you only watch F1, as someone else commented. I literally watch every sport apart from golf so I actually consider sky to be an incredibly good deal, but it’s clear that F1-only fans are getting completely shafted.
            Then again, Sky have always operated with the package model. It makes a hell of a lot more money for them so it’s unfair to have a go at them really, it is a capitalist market afterall..

        • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 2nd July 2014, 9:27

          @braketurnaccelerate you get six channels, all in HD. And they show a lot of football, rugby, golf, cricket and tennis (for but a few major examples).

          The problem only comes when nobody is interested in the other channels, as is the case with many F1 Fans.

          • Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 2nd July 2014, 9:45

            @vettel1 – I guess it takes some of the pain away, but that’s still crazy pricing. $83/month for 6 channels… Don’t you also have to have a TV license or something arbitrary like that as well from the Gov’t?

          • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 2nd July 2014, 12:26

            The price that @keithcollantine is quoting is for the whole TV service. You buy the ‘basic’ sky service which gives you access to hundreds of channels, then you pay about £25 per month for the Sky Sports package on top. It is very expensive, but I can’t imagine there are realistically that many people who are paying for all of that and yet only ever watch F1 and absolutely nothing else.

            But yeah, Sky is disastrously expensive and seems to constantly be getting worse. I’ve come to dread reading letters telling me the ‘good news’ that they’re going to ‘improve the service’ before telling me just how much more I’m going to fork out for what I’ve already had for years.

            Thankfully I’m on the old HD Pack scheme, but I’m looking to move house later in the year and I doubt I’m going to be able to stay on the same pricing plan. I do love F1, but if it comes down to it, I don’t love it enough to pay what Sky want me to pay, for a service which shows 90% sports I’m not at all interested in watching.

            Maybe if F1 itself wasn’t in such a mess, I wouldn’t begrudge paying for it, but not only am I being asked to pay through the nose, I feel like I’m paying for a sort of bad, mickey mouse approximation of the sport I used to love.

        • RACERNORRISKI (@racernorriski) said on 2nd July 2014, 22:59

          There are many, many variables For TV rates here in the U S of A. I live in a senior community in southern California and we have a bulk rate with FIOS (a verizon fiber company) and I get F1 practices qual, prerace, race, post race, and lately some really good shows about F1 for $40.00 a month and that includes hd and an hd recorder.. Us old folks need our money for the liquor store…. SECONDLY, what is good for krillionaire, billionaire bernie is not necessarily goof for F1, F1 fans and racing in general. Just as a side, Bernie recently purchased his PETA Daughter and new son in law a 75million pound (no proper symbol) house for a wedding gift so maybe he is feeling the pinch …………..

    • marsianwalrus (@einariliyev) said on 2nd July 2014, 2:05

      @timi @Todd F1/Sky are clearly not up with the times. There are free HD streams out there, 5000 kbps quality, and they are getting only better every year. Anyone can jack up a laptop to the TV too.

      When legal watching becomes more expensive and illegal watching is free (and getting better in quality/speed) is the time when official numbers start dropping. Oh, wait, it’s already happening.

      • DaveD (@daved) said on 2nd July 2014, 3:57


        I always watch the MSNBC broadcast to support the local boys and help the US TV ratings. But I also watch any extra pre-race and post race as well as any practices NBC is not carrying on Sky F1. I’d even gladly pay some amount to have the Sky F1 coverage as I like their broadcast and coverage. But I have to pirate it because they’re not even allowed to sell it to me in the US for obvious reasons.

      • timi (@timi) said on 2nd July 2014, 19:31

        Couldn’t agree more @einariliyev.

    • Tiomkin said on 2nd July 2014, 9:55

      So long as people pay, Sky will always jack up the price. If you want cheaper or free F1 stop subscribing for a year or two. Then watch as the price falls to £0 and F1 goes back to being FTA. Sky exists to bleed money from subscribers, while brain washing them to think they are getting a good deal. As I said before F1 is in the state it is (mad rules/prices) because short sighted people pay for it.

    • David Tyrrell said on 2nd July 2014, 12:43

      Why don’t people opt to get NOW TV Sky Sports which is £9.99 a month which works out as roughly £120 a year, much cheaper than going stragiht through Sky.

    • Lee Monahan said on 3rd July 2014, 2:44

      That is seriously expensive, but, while the NBCS coverage in the US is cheaper it is horrible. What we do get is P2 and Qualifying as it starts, no pre-coverage or extras. The races might have a 30 min pre-race show but it is mostly recaps from the previous race, more commercials and maybe 2 minutes of something interesting or latest news. The commentators are quite lacking and stiff, though you can often feel their tension of wanting to do more but are on short leashes. The race coverages suck as we don’t get to see all of the pit coverage, documentary style background info, numerous driver and team interviews, local info, behind the scenes details, the in-depth technical analysis or any of the other wonderful features that Sky provides. So for the amount of production you are getting from Sky it really isn’t that bad of a deal. I still wish that they (Sky) could offer stuff via iTunes the way tv shows and movies are, I’d gladly pay $15 per race for a multi-day rental or $25 to buy it and and watch it on any device I like.

  9. In_Silico (@insilico) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:39

    Anyone else feel that F1 is slowly but surely getting more and more ridiculous and unhealthy lately? Ridiculous changes to the rules & absurd comments like this being made by Ecclestone (which seems like a regular occurence). It’s hard not to be pessimistic about my favourite thing on the planet at the moment. Yes there are still some brilliant things about Formula One but there are just some aspects to it which are just so flawed and which are also being overlooked by those in power which does nothing but exasperate the majority of fans. God it’s frustrating.

  10. Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid) said on 2nd July 2014, 0:43

    Well if Ecclestone’s legal team ever try to have any action brought against him delayed indefinitely, they can point to all of his recent comments as proof that he’s mentally unfit to give any evidence or testimony.

  11. Michael C said on 2nd July 2014, 1:06

    It wouldn’t be so bad to lose Monza. Apart from speeds 20kph quicker than anywhere else, there’s nothing exciting about the circuit. Its more costly to run a lap than at other circuits and 60% of one engine use will be at this one race weekend. The race is the shortest of the year, lasting only ~1hr 18mims and if Hamilton, Vettel or Rosberg (possibly) get on the podium, they’ll be booed by some deluded Ferrari fanatics.

    Should Italy not host a grand prix then Luca will put on his angry face, and nobody wants to see that, so another Italian circuit needs to be built/used… or they could invade San Marino – I’m sure they wouldn’t mind.

    *prepares for keyboard warriors*

    • Breno (@austus) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:25

      No, its just one of the most unique and classic tracks on the calendar, loved by drivers, teams and fans. Im all for getting more tracks into the calendar, but not at good venue’s expenses.

      • Michael C said on 2nd July 2014, 1:27

        It’s the easiest to drive on a Playstation I’ll give you that.

        • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 2nd July 2014, 2:01

          It seems easy to drive, Monza consists of straight lines and chicanes but there is a particular corner in the circuit which is the parabolica. This corner is taken at nearly 200 Km (it should me more challenging this year with the increase of top speed and torque), the engine must deliver a constant amount of torque in all the length of the corner just like the last corner in Hungaroring but with much more speed which is a tough task for the engine because it differs from the classic stop and go corners in which the driver brakes and then goes immediately on the gas.
          The minimum variation in speed inside the corner could destabilize the car and causes time loss, that’s why the driver must be very precise on the throttle to maintain stability on the whole corner.
          This stuff is far more complicated than a Playstation !!!!

          • Mackeine Loveine (@cocaine-mackeine) said on 2nd July 2014, 3:09

            @tifoso1989 Also don’t forget the real stats, where in the braking zones drivers most brake so hard that they need to put 2 times their weight in order to stop the car from being in +340 kph to 110 in less than 100 meters.

          • gwenouille (@gwenouille) said on 2nd July 2014, 5:51

            @cocaine-mackeine: is it still so physical no that tey have bbw ?

          • truth said on 2nd July 2014, 6:14

            Which is why we both agree the skill it took vettel to pass alonso, with two wheels on the dirt, around said corner was truly world class. Alonso answering this pass the next year was equally impressive. But it was vettels pass that solidified his status amongst the greats.

    • Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:31

      Keith wrote a very good piece the other day in defence of the Red Bull Ring’s short, unusual (for modern F1) layout. I think the same argument applies to Monza – it’s a truly unique layout in a calendar filled with cookie cutter circuits. So in my book that’s one reason.

      Another for me would be the history of the place. Monza is up there with Monaco, Spa, Silverstone, Suzuka and São Paulo as a track that is intertwined with the identity of the sport, and as such is worthy of inclusion on the calendar.

      A third is that it has a fantastic atmosphere. Sure, take a swipe (as you did) at the Tifosi who aren’t the best losers, but nobody can doubt their love of motor racing or their passion for their team. That atmosphere comes across on tv and adds hugely to the enjoyment of the race for me. Contrast the stands in Monza with what we see in Bahrain every year. It’s nice to see people on TV who come to the races and love doing so.

      Finally Monza puts on some pretty good races. Sure, not every year is a classic, but what track can you say that about?

      So yeah, to me it would be pretty bad to lose Monza. The fact that you point out superfluous points such as race length, cost and engine use as negatives are not convincing. Short doesn’t mean bad, teams aren’t going to go bankrupt by having Monza on the calendar and who doesn’t want to see engines and cars pushed to the limit in Formula 1, especially in the unique way Monza pushes them.

      • Garns (@) said on 2nd July 2014, 13:33

        @Colossal Squid

        No I think the old fella is on to something here mate- Monza has go to go, its had its own way for too long (how dare it be uncommercial in F1!!!) Then we can get rid of the Spa’s, Silverstone’s’ Suzuka’s and of course Monaco that you speak of!! There is no room in modern F1 for tracks that fans worldwide and drivers cant wait for year in year out- its not on really.

        F1 Needs to broaden its horizons and venture to places like Korean, Turkey and the likes………………………. oh wait, we tried that hey- didn’t end too well did it?? :)

        Can someone actually take over from BE at any time soon?? Next thing he will have the cars start in London, go under the tunnel to Paris and wonder why the crowd at track was so low!! :) “Well we have a tunnel in Monaco don’t we??”

    • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:39

      By your logic Silverstone should be dropped because Vettel was actually booed by “some deluded McLaren/Williams fanatics”, Canada should also be dropped.
      What is more exiting to the drivers/fans than getting 20Kph quicker than anywhere else ? This is F1 and Monza is considered as the temple of speed.
      The thing is, if you think that Bernie cares about the sport or the fans blablabla….. then you’re wrong, what he cares about is the cash, if the organizers will agree his financial terms, he will extend the contract as simple as that. Bernie used to use his threatening tactics many times and it worked very well, i just don’t want to think that this is an attempt from Ferrari (Luca in particular) to replace Monza by Mugello on the F1 calendar

      • Mackeine Loveine (@cocaine-mackeine) said on 2nd July 2014, 3:14

        Mugello is not a bad option, I really like the circuit and imagine if someday the F1 can race there. But thing is that there is something special that makes Monza unique-Speed- So if it drops, The Whole F1 loses something.
        That’s what Bernie needs to understand, his destroying F1 with its obsession with politics and cash. He will be strict with his decisions and no one will stop him from making the opposite about them. When Bernie leaves, someday, that would the happiest day for F1.

    • Dozy,Beaky Mick and Titch said on 2nd July 2014, 8:27

      You lack a sense of the history of F1 if you think it would not be so bad to lose Monza!!! The 2 Lesmos, Curva Grande and Parabolica test cars to the limit…….

  12. Bookgrub said on 2nd July 2014, 1:14

    Living in Australia at least I’ve been able to follow the sport on free-to-air TV. However, the broadcaster that runs it, and has for a long time, is struggling financially at the moment and cutting programmes. This year they’ve dropped showing the Moto2 and Moto3 categories in motorbike racing. I think if they decided to stop showing F1 on free-to-air I’d stop following the sport. The ‘sports package’ on Foxtel, our major Pay TV provider, doesn’t carry F1 and still costs $1000+ for a year (on par with the UK costs above).

    International motorsport barely rates a mention in the mainstream media here. An Aussie is leading the Moto3 world championship, but you wouldn’t know there was one unless you were looking. An Aussie won the last Moto2 race from 23rd on the grid, and didn’t even get a mention on the ABC, our BBC equivalent.

    Honestly, while Webber was well known and Ricciardo is getting plenty of coverage at the moment, it seems that’s less because Australia remains particularly interested in F1, and more because of historical inertia. Decisions made by the FIA recently go some way towards slowing that inertia, to my mind.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:54

      I see this as Bernie giving Ferrari a 3rd. car and consequently a bigger share of that part of the revenue not going to Bernies investors, if they get Monza to pay more. Hard to see how Monza in Northern Italy could be a financial disaster for FOM since the teams do all the transporting of kit in their own vehicles, unless of course Bernie put Monza between 2 non-European rounds in which case the problem would be ?

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 2nd July 2014, 2:07

      Now I would like to back-up bookgrubs comments re Australian coverage and mention that Foxtel is a Murdoch company and BskyB is a de facto Murdoch company so our future F1 viewing looks bleak. Bernie and Rupert are like 2 peas from the same pod.

      • William (@william) said on 2nd July 2014, 9:32

        @Bookgrub @hohum – Ten do show Moto2, Moto3 and MotoGP Qualifying as it will be shown live and in full on Ten. I don’t mind about V8s providing that RPM stays. F1 will always be live on FTA on Ten. Ten is set to announce a whole lot of new programs that Peter Meakin has made for Ten, plus Ten is set to bid for AFL, NRL and RU rights

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 3rd July 2014, 2:30

          @william, I am no media expert but Ten network is losing money and seems to be the plaything of media and mineing heirs trying to prove themselves in actual business, how long can this go on? I do watch the MotoGP on 1 but can never find Moto2/3 or Qually. My worry is that 10 network will be outbid for F1, possibly by Foxtel. Keep in mind our beloved Prime minister has just returned from NY where he was granted an audience with Rupert to get his instructions in person, and is actively working on crippling ABC/SBS because they are taking to many viewers away from commercial TV.

          • William said on 3rd July 2014, 9:00

            @hohum – Ten will show Moto2 Quali, Moto3, MotoGP quali and races all live at the Island this year. Ten can’t lose the rights to F1 to Foxtel as it is against the law as Australian round has to be shown live on FTA but I reckon after 2015, Ten will have the rights to all sessions as Dan Ricciardo is doing well and championship contender.

  13. Joaquin (@fat-tyre) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:30

    Yeah right.

  14. Ciaran (@ciaran) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:34

    God, not this again. Ecclestone does this with most races on the calendar, and it’s always for the purpose of forcing the venue owners to renovate (Silverstone), or pay more money (Spa). I wouldn’t mind, but it puts F1 in the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Newer fans won’t understand why he pulls these antics, and it could end up doing more damage than he realises.
    For the record though, Monza only pays $7m per year to host F1, which is the cheapest of all venues excluding Monaco. So they can definitely afford a payment increase, it’s just a matter of how many empty threats Bernie has to pull first.

  15. StefMeister (@stefmeister) said on 2nd July 2014, 1:51

    With regards to Monza, There’s also talk that Luca di Montezemolo wants the Italian Gp moved to the Ferrari owned Mugello circuit.

    But other than that, Its just Bernie been Bernie. Threaten to take the race away, Make the circuit owners who are likely desperate to keep the race panic & eventually they agree to pay what your asking.

    He did the same with Silverstone although one difference between Monza & Silverstone is that Monza have done everything Bernie has asked as far as upgrading the facilities while the BRDC spent about 10 years not really doing much to improve anything Bernie was asking to be improved.
    I’ve heard from a couple people that the old F1 pit buildings were not in great shape & really did need work done & still do since there still as they were.
    I’ve also seen a few thing suggesting that the new buildings aren’t exactly what they could be & I still think the fact that several of the garages can’t be seen from the main grandstand opposite is ridiculous.

1 2 3

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.