What am i paying for?

[ChrisV69]

I think SKY needs to reconsider it's fan base and perhaps approach us for our opinions? I wanted to see the feedback on-line considering how I felt during the Qually session and what I could watch for practice sessions. I personally don't care about SKY's Net Zero commitment or as referred to above, it's paperclip necessity to conform, but I do care about where what little money I have is going. For sure, the F1 juggernaut has to address climate issues and it's impact but I agree shipping presenters has the same footprint as fair trade grapes entering the UK from the EU. This is not just F1, I'm seeing it in other SKY sports coverage. The whole point of delivering premium sports events surely is bringing us less fortunate people the theatre of the event? I'd love to be able financially to consider travel footprint and not budget every month around what is technically a luxury item (SKY sub) but in return, the broadcaster has to consider it's delivery.

Of course there's an impact to the Team due to the number of races, employ more then and send less to each race?? Some I'd happily like to see less anyway.

I'm sorry, SKY has produced an unpolished platform which utterly breaks any atmosphere from the race venue (again not the only sport). I agree with other comments about over engineering a studio presence, it may have improvements to follow but I don't see the need. The studio is huge (cost?), the presenters stand 20 feet apart and the camera frankly makes me sick as it floats around to capture all the content...from a distance. Thank God for record and fast forward. As I certainly could not do a better job, I try not be critical of presenters but dear oh dear, cutting from location action to a bland studio and mumbling presenters, telling us what the race enthusiasts have worked out for themselves 30 mins ago, over and over....bring some dynamics! I see it going only one way, studio, 3-4 race side presenters for 20 odd races and if that's the case, SKY seriously needs to think about content delivery. Or, actually giving a jobby's worth for who pays for all this.

I can get a better product and offers even with SKY channels for half the price, perhaps then it wont hurt so much. If it wasn't for 'certain' presenters, I'd have ditched it long ago.

Yep, time to reconsider the spend. I will be writing to SKY along with the disappointment ditching SKY+HD for SKYQ and losing half the functionality (easily added I'm sure). Should have taken EE's offering.

Keep safe all and hope things improve.

[Stametis]

The run up to qualifying today was perhaps the worst most depressing F1  coverage I've ever tried to sit through, and we've seen some things over the years!

The main thing the presenters do it build up excitement before and around the track action, they do this by conveying the excitement they're feeling from the sounds, smells and crowd atmosphere which can't be broadcast through a TV. 

At least Ted and Brundle were at the track but if F1 switches to this format more often I'll either just VPN another country's broadcast (which an increasing number of my friends are doing anyway) or just watch the highlights on 4. Today's nonsense certainly wasn't worth paying for. 

[MarkGoldsmith]

---

@ChrisV69 wrote:

I think SKY needs to reconsider it's fan base and perhaps approach us for our opinions? I wanted to see the feedback on-line considering how I felt during the Qually session and what I could watch for practice sessions. I personally don't care about SKY's Net Zero commitment or as referred to above, it's paperclip necessity to conform, but I do care about where what little money I have is going. For sure, the F1 juggernaut has to address climate issues and it's impact but I agree shipping presenters has the same footprint as fair trade grapes entering the UK from the EU. This is not just F1, I'm seeing it in other SKY sports coverage. The whole point of delivering premium sports events surely is bringing us less fortunate people the theatre of the event? I'd love to be able financially to consider travel footprint and not budget every month around what is technically a luxury item (SKY sub) but in return, the broadcaster has to consider it's delivery.

Of course there's an impact to the Team due to the number of races, employ more then and send less to each race?? Some I'd happily like to see less anyway.

I'm sorry, SKY has produced an unpolished platform which utterly breaks any atmosphere from the race venue (again not the only sport). I agree with other comments about over engineering a studio presence, it may have improvements to follow but I don't see the need. The studio is huge (cost?), the presenters stand 20 feet apart and the camera frankly makes me sick as it floats around to capture all the content...from a distance. Thank God for record and fast forward. As I certainly could not do a better job, I try not be critical of presenters but dear oh dear, cutting from location action to a bland studio and mumbling presenters, telling us what the race enthusiasts have worked out for themselves 30 mins ago, over and over....bring some dynamics! I see it going only one way, studio, 3-4 race side presenters for 20 odd races and if that's the case, SKY seriously needs to think about content delivery. Or, actually giving a jobby's worth for who pays for all this.

I can get a better product and offers even with SKY channels for half the price, perhaps then it wont hurt so much. If it wasn't for 'certain' presenters, I'd have ditched it long ago.

Yep, time to reconsider the spend. I will be writing to SKY along with the disappointment ditching SKY+HD for SKYQ and losing half the functionality (easily added I'm sure). Should have taken EE's offering.

Keep safe all and hope things improve.

---

You aren't actually paying Sky to watch a "premium" version with better coverage of F1 what you are paying for is the ability to watch all the sessions (excluding silverstone) live and in full as Sky is the only way to be that in the UK.

Fundamentally its the ability to watch a sporting event live that gets the various sports pay TV channels subscribers, as if you are a fan of that sport and you want to watch it live that is your only option. The wrap around coverage they provide for a sport ( and for a number of sports its quite limited ) is generally watched by far fewer viewers than those who watch the actually sporting event live. 

I'm expecting the wrap-around sports coverage to actually decrease over the next several years as the "YouTube" generation of sports fans don't really sit through 60 or 90 minute pre/post event shows. They tend to want to consume the analytical/interview content in smaller/shorter vidoes on a site like YouTube where they can pick and choose exactly what they want to watch.

[ChrisV69]

The point being premium sporting event not the version, so you're saying the wrap around coverage i.e the theater isnt funded by subscribers? I think it is and, 'should' trends lead away from providing that, so be it. However, some actually enjoy the coverage, the build up and post analysis of the event which takes us back to the original point. If SKY want to switch things up as they are perfectly entitled to do for whatever reason they decide to front, should us subscribers have a negative opninion (which going by social media appears to be the case), we're paying the money and allowed to vent. I've been with SKY for 19 years and today was the worst coverage since they started live coverage...my opinion. I'm not privileged to go to these events and if SKY weren't interested in the wrap around they would just broadcast the event...live. Thus, we're discussing the coverage switch and what we're paying for. Switch to a studio if thats the requirement but please dont deliver us a half ar5ed attempt, this unfortunately is going to require presenting dynamics which we don't have. Thankfully we still have the Team at the races to fill the gaps. Lets see how things transpire but seems they've shelled on this platform.....virtual dance floor I believe it was called, brilliant.

Some want the coverage surrounding the event, some dont, each to their own.

A question then, why didn't SKY survey opinion on a coverage switch, they've had two races to announce it?

[tarbat]

The point is, Sky are going more for an "entertainment" style with their presentation team. Watching here this weekend in Frösakull (Sweden) on F1 TV, the coverage is far more track-based and focused on the actual race-day. With Sky's studio based presentation, you lose so much of the trackside atmosphere.

Just one example from this morning on F1 TV, Laura and Alex Brundle presenting from the  grid.

And Alex Brundle's Grid Walk was all about the cars and drivers, not the celebrities.

[SCPerry134]

I have just watched, Sky's F1 coverage of the Australian grand prix and have to say it was the worst coverage i have ever witnessed. I ended up skipping through all the studio talk from the likes of Naomi etc as it was totally boring. The worst about this is i am paying for it. I dont think it has anything to do with net zero but Sky just trying to save money. All this will do is lower Sky's profits as viewers will just cancel their subscriptions to Sky F1. The race and commentary were and are brilliant, together with Ted, but the rest from the studio were forgetable.

Many wont  bother watching Japan and China on Sky if this is the format they will be taking and i will be one of them. They think they are being clever but will realise in the long run once they lost subscribers that this wss the wrong move.

Finally i would just like to add this is formula 1 not a model show,.

[lettice]

---

@ChrisV69 wrote:

The point being premium sporting event not the version, so you're saying the wrap around coverage i.e the theater isnt funded by subscribers? I think it is and, 'should' trends lead away from providing that, so be it. However, some actually enjoy the coverage, the build up and post analysis of the event which takes us back to the original point. If SKY want to switch things up as they are perfectly entitled to do for whatever reason they decide to front, should us subscribers have a negative opninion (which going by social media appears to be the case), we're paying the money and allowed to vent. I've been with SKY for 19 years and today was the worst coverage since they started live coverage...my opinion. I'm not privileged to go to these events and if SKY weren't interested in the wrap around they would just broadcast the event...live. Thus, we're discussing the coverage switch and what we're paying for. Switch to a studio if thats the requirement but please dont deliver us a half ar5ed attempt, this unfortunately is going to require presenting dynamics which we don't have. Thankfully we still have the Team at the races to fill the gaps. Lets see how things transpire but seems they've shelled on this platform.....virtual dance floor I believe it was called, brilliant.

Some want the coverage surrounding the event, some dont, each to their own.

A question then, why didn't SKY survey opinion on a coverage switch, they've had two races to announce it?

---

That is a nice balanced summary of the changes this weekend.
Always fine to have debate, when its not just in the easy form of 'I hate Sky' and 'I will cancel my subscription or direct debit' kind of answer.

Would be useful for you to email VR with exactly what you have laid out here with your views,.I am sure it will find its way to the F1 production team and be a good constructive set of customer comments for them to look at.

Send an email to the Sky Viewer relations team via;
ViewerR@sky.uk

I have sent constructive 'positive/negative' comments on some recent Sports content and have had responses and further chats with the relevant Sky Sports teams recently and in past years. 

As for surveys, Sky often do target Sky customers, I was recently asked about some of their sports content and some recent changes and proposals (alas not F1 for this recent one) Surveys are also often random audience choosing and can be run via a third party like Yougov or Opinium.

Of course as you mention, its easy these days to capture a feel of something from social media, the likes of fan forums, here and other forms of todays internet communication. Sky would certainly take that on board and be aware.

[lettice]

My view of this whole weekend.

The live and studio set up worked ok.
Do I like it, no. As it removes a lot of the local track atmosphere, which is a major part of the pre, post and build up coverage.

Natalie, with her many years of Sky F1 and Sky Sports experience is handling it all well. I am sure with her many years on board with F1, she must have some kind of not so positive thoughts about it herself. But as a professional, she handled it all well. 

The standing feet apart at times, just to get the backdrop video screen in is odd and rather disjointed. 

Karun just doing his normal chat fine, hes a great asset for Sky using a table top skypad all worked well. But think saying that the Skypad upright is the way it should stay.

Thankfully, we still had the great commentary, four of the team at the trackside and of course Ted doing his excellent work.

[Jo30whit]

Totally agree, no atmosphere whatsoever, no banter, no nothing...
Liberty Media are trying to make F1 a spectacle event at each race, and the coverage used to be excellent.

This is a megga backward step. 
I appreciate it's only for a few races, and the reasons behind it etc, but Sky is a luxury we choose to have in our homes for a reason , and one we pay a fairly high price for... 

If you need to cut the number of presenters down, then fine, but you must have presenters trackside delivering the coverage we pay for.

[Cranbourne+Poache]

Yeah it's very jarring, I'm going to skip watching the pre race show.

[MarkGoldsmith]

Personally I felt the pre-race show to be snappier in its shorter 60 minute format.

The 90 minute build up really does drag on with far too much un-necessary repetitive filler, particularly with 24 races a year. 

Until they get to the actual grid walk portion of the show you could easily think you are watching a pre-race build up from

any of the previous races that season with the amount of repetition you actually see in terms of questions, debates, opinions asked.

[mr.tickle]

---

@SCPerry134 wrote:

Many wont  bother watching Japan and China on Sky if this is the format they will be taking and i will be one of them. They think they are being clever but will realise in the long run once they lost subscribers that this wss the wrong move.

Finally i would just like to add this is formula 1 not a model show,.

---

If someone doesn't watch a race, just because of the quality of the coverage, then simply they are not a fan of F1. They are just casual viewers.

Real fans of F1 watch every race no matter what and will seek out live coverage above all else (and then we complain about things, but we ALWAYS watch). Watching non-live on C4 just because of that, talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!

The only point I agree with, and it's a very minor point indeed, is the "glam wear" of two of the 3 presenters in the studio. In an age where we are saying that women should be judged one what they say/do and not how they look, it felt like a backwards step to me. Natalie's heels were so high that she had difficulty even walking in them. If I wanted to see that I'd watch the Oscar's red carpet show.

[SteveHale]

The F1 presentation this weekend is absolute rubbish.

This dipping in and out of studio commentry is rubbish......

So soleless.

At a time when they have been sending notices out about Sky fees going up as well!

[tarbat]

The only point I agree with, and it's a very minor point indeed, is the "glam wear" of two of the 3 presenters in the studio. In an age where we are saying that women should be judged one what they say/do and not how they look, it felt like a backwards step to me. Natalie's heels were so high that she had difficulty even walking in them.

---

No high heels for Laura on F1 TV. Just serious, in-depth analysis from the pitlane.

Back in the UK today, and caught up on Sky's coverage. It's not a style of presentation that I like, but maybe it appeals more to the casual F1 viewer rather than the dedicated fan. After all, the dedicated F1 fan has no real choice on where to view F1 in the UK, so Sky don't need to worry about losing them.

[fisbo]

I thought the studio presentation was soulless and uninspiring.  They can spend money on all the graphics they want, it doesn’t replace getting the atmosphere at the venue and nothing they tried to hype about it "AR" had a wow factor.  I also question if the presenters can do the job we have come to expect when they can’t interact with drivers, team principles, mechanics and F1 insiders at the track that often provides us with insights and stories not issued on social media. Seriously questioning spending the money on Sky Sports, with all the channels\sports that I don’t watch it’s becoming never mind the quality feel the width TV.