I guess emitting toxic sludge that's creating craters visible from space, some nearly 50 sq klms in size, poisoning waterways that will eventually leach across the planet and that poisons plants anywhere nearby is ok then - just as long as their are no fumes you can see. This toxic waste was found to have radiation levels three times the background radiation level and was made up of a cocktail of acids, heavy metals, carcinogens and radioactive material
If you guys want to lean back for a moment you might realize that William is vocal about his opinion but he doesn't really mind if his opinion differs from others or the main stream. A bunch of people here seem to lose their heads about people thinking differently and especially about not being able to 'correct' those thoughts.
L Well said. I though forums were platforms to exchange opinions. It seems some people here want to turn this one into a self-appreciation society. But that's fine. I try to project what I imagine the future to be. Looking back and repeating past experience is not my thing; so I imagine that after atom and turbo era, F1 will stay hybrid for a while, then go petrol- electric carrying a tiny generator to extend the range beyond the plug-in facility, then fully electric on day. My sin is to express my vision in the company of people who seem to resist that evolution. But to hear that, since I am in the minority , I should just bow down and join the majority in this discussion I found hilarious. Is it the way you conduct your life Bas? No hard feeling anyway, I hope we can still discuss in a civilised manner about other issues. Cheers to all.
No. But if 50 people want to go on a group holiday, 47 of them vote to go to a warm exotic place, but 3 want to go to the northpole...we're not going to the Northpole, are we?
But this was different; you expected me to support the vociferous majority in protesting something I don't have much issue with (lack of noise and complexity) to bring back something I don't particularly want back. Sorry, but I can't do that.
I'm not asking you to support it, but at least think about what the majority of fans want. But now of course I'm reminded you don't believe in the fans, and apparently have no concept of what will happen when there are no more fans.
Also, I don't think the majority of F1 followers have left it. It's only 60 millions that have deserted it; overall a minority if one believes the figures. But enough of that ....
Hey, I have no problem with arguments from the other side, that's part of the fun. No, the thing that gets me going is that: 1) william seems content to offer up ideas that would possibly (or perhaps likely given the current state of affairs) degrade the sport even more (as measured by customers served) and when he is presented with reasons why his proposals would be a bad idea because of that his response is basically, "so what I don't care". It's like this is all about him and everyone else (tens of thousands of customers) be dammed. and 2) william, based on his own words in several posts doesn't seem to care much for F1 anyway, all the while vociferously injecting his vision of how it could be "improved" from his POV. Those things combined have the appearance of someone who is tone deaf all the while indifferent to the people he is arguing with. It's not a good look. I mean, I don't care much for NASCAR but I don't spend one second trying to convince those guys to go hybrid or ditch the ovals, or change the body style or any of it because I'm not that conceded to think they care two hoots about what I think about their sport. You know what I mean? From my POV, if the fans absolutely loved the PU's and the look of the cars and all that and the numbers of fans in the stands and in front of the tele swelled then I would say, hey, I'm in the minority, FIA and F1, you guys have it right, I'll just shut up about it. But that is not what is happening. The fans (i.e. the customers) are heading for the exits. I don't know about you guys but when I have a business and more customers head for the exits than come in the door, I begin to wonder if the product I am offering is the right one. -F
I agree on the part that William can be abrasive at times. I don't feel it here, I agree fully with his points. I also follow F1 from a similar perspective. Whenever possible I make an effort to watch races. I maybe miss between one and three a year. But would the sport be gone, I'd be busy with something else, too. So, I guess, I share his keen interest but also the distance. You say his argument directly leads to F1 be ran into the ground. I have same opinion about all of yours. If any of those people that have been a bit more vocal on the recent pages would get to run F1 according to their statements here, I think they'd run it down in the near future. I get all the part of the thrill and the excitement untameable beasty cars provide. But then, that was yesterday and tomorrow is something else. As PSK pointed out the other day, perhaps F1 is a thing of the past. Innovation in the motor world has largely shifted to the digital age and away from mechanical contribution. The hayday of was in the times when a clever engineer could come up with stuff that could be manufactured next door and bolted onto the car the next morning. That is all long gone. That's why F1 has turned to be so artificial.
Do any of you guys really believe that if we had the exact same races as we have had in the past 2 or 3 years, with the same Mercedes domination, and the same performance gaps between all of the teams, with the exact same results for every race, but with the noise levels of the old V8/V10 engines, then everybody with an interest in F1 would overlook the boring processions and lack of overtaking, and simply marvel at F1 because of the noise? Sorry, but if you think the noise levels are the main reason why interest in F1 is dwindling then you've seriously misjudged F1's problems! The lack of close, wheel to wheel racing, with more drivers able to challenge for points, podiums, race wins and Championships are far bigger reasons than the lack of noise. The much vaunted V8's and V10's also had their periods of dwindling fan interest, despite the noise that they made. Why?: Boring, predictable, processional races, that's why! And that's been the biggest issue for the last few seasons in F1: A basic lack of racing. Had all of the drivers from Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull, McLaren and Williams been duking it out wheel to wheel on track every race weekend, then we'd all be raving about F1 once more, and the noise would be a minor after thought. As for going back to the old engines, how many of the team bosses from the manufacturer teams are calling for that? Toto Wolff?: No Maurizio Arrivabene?: No Cyril Abiteboul?: No The team bosses who do not make their own engines are making a lot of noise about going back to the old engines, but that's more to do with the fact that they cost a lot less, more than the fact that they were noisier. If they had the choice between a highly competitive quiet engine, or an uncompetitive noisy engine for the same money, guess which one they would take! It's not old style noisy engines that will get people coming back to F1, it's closer racing, and if Red Bull can join Ferrari in challenging Mercedes this season, then that fact will be proven.
I must not be making my points very clearly. Never once did I complain about william's abrasiveness. I wonder how you could even come to that conclusion based on what I have written. No, it's the content of the argument and the position he comes from that rubs me (us?) the wrong way. Yes, I assert that his suggestions (stick with the current formula period, no changes to the PU, move towards full electric, don't listen to the customers, don't consider why more customers are leaving F1 than coming into the sport, not consider things like the sound and the sights and the smells as part of the entertainment, enclosed cockpits, semi-covered wheels, etc.) will lead to more of the same. You see, the flight of the customers is not theoretical it is actually happening now, it's been happening for a few years now. It's a very real situation. Now, we can all debate what is causing the customers to leave. And I concede there are several things in play but I also assert the sounds of the PU's and the weird look of the current cars (noses specifically) are turning some (more than a few?) customers away. Now, let's compare william's suggestions with suggestion made by others here. Bas has made several solid suggestions as how to win back the customers. There have been others too. I assert their suggestions will lead to that way more customer retention than william's will. I assert his suggestion will drive even more customers away! I mean he's even conceded he doesn't even care about that, he's just injecting what HE would like to see with no consideration how it might be received by the fans in general. See the vast gulf in perspectives? They couldn't be any more stark. -F
Those are all solid points. It's a combination of things. Now, to be fair, let's look at the period of Ferrari's domination in the 2000's. Pretty much the equivalent of MB's dominance of today, no? And yet the fans packed the stands, right? Maybe that had to do with the personalities in the car (Schumacher, Hakkinen, Montoya, etc.) and maybe it had to do with the fact that it was Ferrari on top, a lot of fans like Ferrari. Maybe the racing was more wheel to wheel even though Ferrari almost always won. I do remember the term "parade" being bandied about during that time. So yes, exciting racing is definitely a part of it. But based on previous seasons going way back where one team was dominant, yet the stands were packed, there has to be more to it than that. Something brought people in during that time even though the winner was often a foregone conclusion. -F
Its not noise, it's music! If you think its mere noise then you're right it's immaterial. You can see where this is really going... It's really about the relevance of racing... period. The relevance of cars as lions (loud and dangerous) instead of kittens. It's about (with apologies) our liquidating into a species of "I don't care... I'd rather be posting on my phone or connect via my computer. Who wants to go to a hot smelly noisy sports event... Ew... How uncivilized... So embarrassing." And yes some of us are wishing, as my grandfather did, that the world would just stop changing. So no noise isn't the only issue. Watching Nigel Mansell run away in a Williams car week after week did take away from the "sport" quite a while ago and it was plenty noise. So purely my perspective, but if your business model is about to die anyway, I say why not go out with a bang? Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
I gave a possible reason for the decline in F1 audience, but most people ignored it and went on a tangent about the formula. F1 becomes just too expensive to follow. Track tickets prices are exorbitant, and increasingly a deterrent not to go to a GP. On TV, F1 can almost be seen live on satellite channels, pay-as-you-watch, etc which are more and more expensive. So, I think the F1 fans, or casual followers, feel they are increasingly taken to the cleaners. It's not surprise F1 is expensive since it's in the end of big business interested in making money above everything else. If they can't sell the show, maybe they have overpriced it and need to review their business forecast. Just an idea.
There's validity to that. TV packages aren't that expensive in general, it's just that people don't care to pay extra ($20-$50 per month?) for it because they don't think the product is worth it. And going to the track can cost more than just a little bit but it's probably about the same as most sporting/main line entertainment alternatives, no? So like with the TV packages, it's just that people don't feel they are getting the value compared to other entertainment options. It could be a combination of the product on the track, the lack of fan access to the pits, the long lines everywhere, poor facilities, etc. but whatever it is, more fans are saying "no" than there are new fans saying "yes". So the numbers drop. If F1 and the FIA cater more to the customers, while keeping the teams and track facilities happy as well, everything will fall into place. Bernie seems to have miscalculated that equation, more money for himself and his investors, less for the tracks and less value for the fans and here were are. Bernie strangled the golden goose and now she no longer pops out golden eggs every 30 days. Now what? -F
Exactly what I was going to say. I didn't see a big Exodus when Ferrari was running away with it. Here's the thing with entertainment. In order for it to be exceptional, it has to make people feel something. ANY form of entertainment. Make people laugh or cry or thrill them, scare them and you get them coming back for more because humans want to feel. Sight, sound and smell all have a huge impact on generating those feelings. People can keep claiming it doesn't make a difference, but it does. I watch F1 today and think "so what." But I start up my Huracan and can't keep from grinning. I also love the smell of 2-stroke engines. Smell is one of the senses most closely tied to memory. Discount these things all you want, but they matter when it comes to entertainment because it is not something people have to spend money on. You want to keep people in the seats, you have to make them feel something.
When Schumacher / Ferrari were dominating, it was never a sure thing like the last 3 seasons. Cars routinely failed. Engines blew. That brought excitement and suspense. Any F1 fan of that era remembers being on the edge of their seat with a few laps to go hoping the car would last (or if your driver was behind,… praying for the explosion). Mandated reliability has hurt the "show".
As an aside, it's my impression that KERS/DRS has allowed for more passing, not less. (Maybe I am conflating the two, maybe it's more about DRS rather than KERS.) What do you guys think about that? -F
Maybe the hardcore F1 fans will go to GPs, or buy TV packages whatever the cost, but the average punter who has several hobbies to satisfy, and not only this this one, finds that F1 has priced itself out and offers bad value for money. Some posters have mentioned that F1 should change the quality of the show to regain its audience; for me, the priority is to lower the cost to recapture that audience. Two different schools of thoughts ...
Er, that is what I understood from Jana's post: It is funny that we are having this discussion when from where I sit, F1 has turned a positive corner and we have just had the first real race for ages .... Pete
I stopped watching F1 in this period as it was a sure thing, plus Ferrari team orders which really annoyed me. Pete
Yep. Typically it's better to move up market, not down market, unless you're trying to make a run at mass appeal (Walmart). But I don't think mass appeal on the level of Walmart is really where F1 is at. And TV pricing probably won't go down much. And the price of a ticket to a GP race is probably in line with other entertainment options like major sporting events or blue chip concert acts. If that is the case, then F1 needs to focus not on reducing pricing, but on upping value. Whether that is adjusting the product on the track or improving the facilities or improving access to the cars/drivers, or adding or improving TV/internet elements or whatever. F1 has found itself in a bit of a challenge delivering desirable product to the customer. But if they get that right again, everything else (including the pot of gold for the teams, sponsors, and Liberty Media) will fall into place. But first, F1 has to serve the customer. Anything else is just rearranging the deck chairs on a slowly sinking ship. -F
