Forum Replies Created
27th March 2014, 4:34 at 4:34 am #253994
1. What country are you in (and state, if applicable)
2. Which channels broadcast F1 near you?
NBC Sports Network
3. Do they show all the races live or only a limited number (if so, how many?)
4. Do they also show qualifying live?
5. Do they also show practice sessions live?
6. If they are a subscription channel, what does a full year’s subscription cost (excluding limited time offers)?
Depends on provider. (Example: $60/month “Digital Starter” from Comcast)
7. Do they broadcast coverage online? If so please post link/s
Yes. Included with TV subscription. Not available as a internet only subscription.
8. Please supply any other relevant information such as alternative viewing options
None17th March 2014, 3:37 at 3:37 am #252927
First, the F1.com site is run by FOM (commercial rights holder) not the FIA (governing body).
The “new” F1 app is much improved, it includes things like Team Radio and BBC 5 Live commentary. It is not perfect, however, and there were some bugs during the race (drivers simply disappeared from the timing pages and Massa was stuck in the middle of the field even if he never made it passed turn 1.) To FOM’s credit, their Twitter page for the app was active through the race and provided updates as to the glitches. Also they were able to fix most of the issues on the fly, which was good. Also the pricing has been reduced to $11 for the season. To me, that is totally fair, given the extra features such as team radio.
To answer your other question, there is no other way to get full timing information this year. I do share your frustration with the lack of a desktop alternative. I would have liked to see a paid desktop version as well.7th March 2014, 4:49 at 4:49 am #251021
2) Williams and especially Valteri Bottas
3) Kimi Räikkönen
8) 7 – (Nico, Lewis, Kimi, Fernando, Jenson, Sebastian, and Valteri)
10) Germany14th December 2013, 19:44 at 7:44 pm #247153
This dispute, I think, leads to a fundamental question of what F1 is: a driver sport or a team sport? I think it’s always been the latter. The driver is only one part of the chain, an important one but not the only one. I suppose many disagree, but I see nothing wrong with the very technical and precise nature of race operations. To me the idea of full speed all the time is very juvenile, we should award the team/driver who is able to apply the best combination of thought and racing talent.18th March 2013, 4:39 at 4:39 am #228923
I would concur with Nicholas. It’s not Kimi’s job to accommodate the engineer during the race. The engineer is there to support the driver, that support should be defined by the driver.25th December 2012, 0:07 at 12:07 am #220951
I would choose something more modern. Probably an F2007…31st July 2012, 4:51 at 4:51 am #206374
These rumors of Kimi going back to Ferrari are pretty ridiculous to me. While Kimi would not really care about having Alonso as his teammate, I don’t see it working. Alonso is clearly the favorite there. Also given that Kimi was basically pushed out for 2010 despite having a contract, there is just too much bad blood.4th April 2012, 5:14 at 5:14 am #198577
I agree with the idea as I like Spa. However, I realize it is really not up to any of us to decide. At the end of the day what FOM think is in the best intrest of the sport will be the calendar we get. Remember most of this money goes to the teams. Bernie does not take it for himself.26th January 2012, 2:11 at 2:11 am #190916
iPhone 4 (iOS 5.0.1) with Default Safari browser.26th January 2012, 2:10 at 2:10 am #190895
If SOPA/PIPA were enacted as written it very well could effect F1Fanatic.co.uk. The real risk is that in the live blogs people openly share links to streams which violate the copyrights of FOM and the broadcaster. Under current law, which is the DMCA, the site is not responsible for users actions as long as they remove it. SOPA could change all of that. This would create a massive compliance structure which Keith would have the manage.
Note: I have not read the text of the legislation or am a Lawyer so my post may not be entirely correct23rd December 2011, 20:57 at 8:57 pm #188048
I doubt he will step into the Lotus chassis and resume “service as usual.” It’s clear that he is a talented driver, but he will not be able to adjust in one instance. He has used KERS and the aero rules have only changed marginally since he left in 2009. The largest adjustment will be the Pirelli tires. His driving style on the Bridgestone’s was known to be gentle. How this will translate to the Pirelli’s is unknown. However, he has done a change in tire manufactures before Michelin to Bridgestone in 2007. Though all the Michelin teams had to as well so the impact could have been mitigated.
The Lotus chassis is also a big variable it could be terrible or it could be brilliant. I am going to guess it will be somewhere in between. Kimi can provide feedback for the car, so I doubt that will be an issue. How Lotus develops over the course of the season will be another matter as in 2011 it was an exponential decay.19th December 2011, 17:10 at 5:10 pm #187906
I think that is a separate issue. This deal does not mean Virgin won’t be carrying the Sky F1 channel.17th December 2011, 4:07 at 4:07 am #176721
Instead of posting a new thread I though I will just revive this one.
Along with the Senna film now being available on iTunes for rental you can stream the film on Netflix in HD in the U.S. Disk rental is not available yet with no ETA.8th December 2011, 21:07 at 9:07 pm #187199
The scenario here with Sky is rather interesting. In the United States, for example, content production is for the most part independent of the content providers. For example, SPEED channel, the content producer, is a subsidiary of FOX, which is a subsidiary of News Corp (they also own Sky). Content providers such as Comcast, Dish Network, and DIRECTV are their own entities and pay SPEED to provide the channel to their subscribers. In your situation Sky is both the producer and the provider. They do it would appear sell their content out to Virgin Media as well, but that is beside the point. In terms of price it does not seem to make a difference as Sky would be about 567 USD or 47.25 USD per month and I don’t have the numbers at the moment but SPEED probably is not that far off.
As some have pointed out what you get for your 363 pounds is a lot more than 1 F1 channel. So I would say that trying to say you pay x pounds per hour or race is just not true. Of course the ideal scenario would be for Sky to provide a lower cost F1 only subscription. However, while it probably would be cheaper it would be pretty expensive for what you are getting (1 channel). Also I am sure in that case they would make you pay for all the equipment, etc. I doubt this is going to happen. While its pretty clear BSkyB is making a healthy income based on their Income Statement I think some of the attacks on them are a bit much. I know F1 was basically free to view on the BBC but if they can’t afford to broadcast it or want to allocate resources differently you can’t blame Sky for it.17th November 2011, 1:18 at 1:18 am #184680
The free to air issue only applies to the UK. The BBC pays FOM (Formula One Management ie. Bernie) from the TV license fee’s payed by British residents to broadcast in the UK only. SPEED channel (owned by News Corp) in the U.S. pays FOM for the rights to broadcast in the United States. Thus what contract BBC or Sky has with FOM has no effect on what happens in the U.S. Also SPEED or SPEED HD is far from free to air!