Discussion:
ESPN
(too old to reply)
Heron
2018-04-08 16:28:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Shockingly excellent coverage today from ESPN,
not a single race interrupting commercial so far.
Mark Jackson
2018-04-08 17:07:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron
Shockingly excellent coverage today from ESPN,
not a single race interrupting commercial so far.
No in-race commercials at all - just the occasional logo in the upper
right corner noting coverage brought to us by Mothers [car cosmetic care
products]! But is this model economically sustainable for ESPN?

I found the commentary excellent as well, also shocking given Australia.
I put the difference down to at least one of: Croft dialed it back
(we did get more Brundle), the race was intrinsically more interesting,
or I wasn't half asleep.
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
This quote is often falsely attributed to Mark Twain.
- Randall Munroe
D Munz
2018-04-08 18:25:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by Heron
Shockingly excellent coverage today from ESPN,
not a single race interrupting commercial so far.
No in-race commercials at all - just the occasional logo in the upper
right corner noting coverage brought to us by Mothers [car cosmetic care
products]! But is this model economically sustainable for ESPN?
I found the commentary excellent as well, also shocking given Australia.
I put the difference down to at least one of: Croft dialed it back
(we did get more Brundle), the race was intrinsically more interesting,
or I wasn't half asleep.
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
This quote is often falsely attributed to Mark Twain.
- Randall Munroe
I was good to see ESPN (and Liberty?) course correct here. The issue with ESPN will be on the value of the time if they used it for other sports. As I understand it, Liberty are giving them the coverage at no cost. Whatever they get from Mothers and pre and post adds go directly into ESPN's pockets.

I expect they will keep this up until Liberty sorts to the OOT deal and then we will have to see.

FWIW
DLM
D Munz
2018-04-10 23:20:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of 2018.

That has to be a good thing.

FWIW
DLM
News
2018-04-11 01:25:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of 2018.
That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
~misfit~
2018-04-11 03:44:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of
2018. That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
No, Liberty is leveraging ESPN and insisting that they run ad-free or lose
their peachy deal.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
News
2018-04-11 11:53:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by News
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of
2018. That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
No, Liberty is leveraging ESPN and insisting that they run ad-free or lose
their peachy deal.
Peachy? Rotten? Past its sell-by date...
Bigbird
2018-04-11 06:28:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of 2018.
That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
Lol, as if.
Sir Tim
2018-04-11 06:32:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of 2018.
That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
It must be sad always to see the negatives.
News
2018-04-11 11:54:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by News
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of 2018.
That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
It must be sad always to see the negatives.
As opposed to be the wide-eyed optimist.

Yes, risk-adjustment makes eminent sense.
Bobster
2018-04-12 05:48:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by News
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest of 2018.
That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
It must be sad always to see the negatives.
Broadcasters have to be able to justify the expenditure, so the concern is perhaps overstated but not unfounded.

But you know, I see a lot of comment lately about how LM are backing down or can't make up their minds or whatever.

EG there was a rumour at Bahrain that one of the sponsors was going to trot out grid girls to get brand exposure. This then led to comments along the lines of "if they can't make up their minds about grid girls, how are they going to stand up to Ferrari."

I think there is a different, valid way of looking at things like this: Namely that the current management are dynamic and pragmatic and listen to the various stake holders and are willing to fine tune their processes and policies for the overall betterment of the sport. And that seems to me a good thing.

Did anybody see actual grid girls at Bahrain?
DumbedDownUSA
2018-04-12 09:44:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by News
Post by D Munz
Well they just announced that ESPN will be add free for the rest
of 2018. >>
Post by News
Post by D Munz
That has to be a good thing.
FWIW
DLM
Ominous... Advertisers can't justify the cost of ad creation and placement.
It must be sad always to see the negatives.
Broadcasters have to be able to justify the expenditure, so the
concern is perhaps overstated but not unfounded.
But you know, I see a lot of comment lately about how LM are backing
down or can't make up their minds or whatever.
EG there was a rumour at Bahrain that one of the sponsors was going
to trot out grid girls to get brand exposure. This then led to
comments along the lines of "if they can't make up their minds about
grid girls, how are they going to stand up to Ferrari."
It's a vailid point. They made getting rid of grid girls a statement on
their branding and the perception of F1. To have made a big deal of
something so trivial and then appear to have backed down or backtracked
would indeed look weak and/or short sighted.
Post by Bobster
I think there is a different, valid way of looking at things like
this: Namely that the current management are dynamic and pragmatic
and listen to the various stake holders and are willing to fine tune
their processes and policies for the overall betterment of the sport.
And that seems to me a good thing.
Spin it if you like but implementation without consultation is risky if
you are not 100% certain of your plan.
--
Trump averages six falsehoods a day; how you doin'?
Moderate! an unwitting ignorant cowardly racist, latrine cleaning
mawine and proud of it.
Dense, if you are reading this you lied.
John
2018-04-08 21:38:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
~misfit~
2018-04-09 04:41:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
That's Croft - he's a motor-mouth twat and the weakest link in the Sky
coverage.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
larkim
2018-04-09 14:06:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely
not understandable.
That's Croft - he's a motor-mouth twat and the weakest link in the Sky
coverage.
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
I only have Ch4 coverage, but I know Croft from his days on the radio.

And that's where I suspect his issue is - he hasn't properly adapted from
having to describe everything for the listener to allowing the pictures to
tell the story.
~misfit~
2018-04-10 00:58:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by larkim
Post by ~misfit~
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely
not understandable.
That's Croft - he's a motor-mouth twat and the weakest link in the
Sky coverage.
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief
has a cozy little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
I only have Ch4 coverage, but I know Croft from his days on the radio.
And that's where I suspect his issue is - he hasn't properly adapted
from having to describe everything for the listener to allowing the
pictures to tell the story.
I've heard that before - personally I wish he'd go back to radio. I think
the main reason he's still there is because he was an early adopter
[relatively] of social media and his '#askcrofty' twatter account gets lots
of hits. Not that his 'answers' are usully worth hearing. In fact he mainly
reports what people are saying rather than answering questions - it's more a
straw poll of sorts on which he reports on Sky.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
t***@gmail.com
2018-04-10 01:11:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
which he reports on Sky.
Your pirated Sky.
You fucking idiot.
t***@gmail.com
2018-04-09 21:56:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
That's Croft - he's a motor-mouth twat and the weakest link in the Sky
coverage.
You mean your pirated Sky coverage.
You fucking fool.
Bobster
2018-04-09 05:55:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.

I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other, the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
Sir Tim
2018-04-09 09:01:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.
I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep
breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other,
the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available
than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
Interesting how opinions change. James Allen took a *lot* of stick when he
did the job yet now some folk would like to see him back. Murray was/is a
great character but I was never that impressed with him as a commentator,
much preferring Raymond Baxter. That is until I watched some old film and
was horrified by how stilted and “BBC” Baxter sounded to modern ears.

I’m quite happy with Crofty, although perhaps he should slow down a bit.
--
Sir Tim
Dan the Man
2018-04-10 16:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by Bobster
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.
I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep
breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other,
the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available
than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
Interesting how opinions change. James Allen took a *lot* of stick when he
did the job yet now some folk would like to see him back. Murray was/is a
great character but I was never that impressed with him as a commentator,
much preferring Raymond Baxter. That is until I watched some old film and
was horrified by how stilted and “BBC” Baxter sounded to modern ears.
I’m quite happy with Crofty, although perhaps he should slow down a bit.
--
Sir Tim
As a Yank, I have to say Croft is an improvement over the old NBC guy, Leigh Diffey. Yes, Croft is excitable, but Diffey was just shrill.
News
2018-04-10 16:47:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan the Man
Post by Sir Tim
Post by Bobster
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.
I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep
breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other,
the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available
than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
Interesting how opinions change. James Allen took a *lot* of stick when he
did the job yet now some folk would like to see him back. Murray was/is a
great character but I was never that impressed with him as a commentator,
much preferring Raymond Baxter. That is until I watched some old film and
was horrified by how stilted and “BBC” Baxter sounded to modern ears.
I’m quite happy with Crofty, although perhaps he should slow down a bit.
--
Sir Tim
As a Yank, I have to say Croft is an improvement over the old NBC guy, Leigh Diffey. Yes, Croft is excitable, but Diffey was just shrill.
While that is true, both Hobbs and Matchett are missed.
D Munz
2018-04-10 18:55:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Dan the Man
As a Yank, I have to say Croft is an improvement over the old NBC guy, Leigh Diffey. Yes, Croft is excitable, but Diffey was just shrill.
While that is true, both Hobbs and Matchett are missed.
+1

FWIW
DLM
Dan the Man
2018-04-11 16:34:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Dan the Man
Post by Sir Tim
Post by Bobster
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.
I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep
breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other,
the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available
than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
Interesting how opinions change. James Allen took a *lot* of stick when he
did the job yet now some folk would like to see him back. Murray was/is a
great character but I was never that impressed with him as a commentator,
much preferring Raymond Baxter. That is until I watched some old film and
was horrified by how stilted and “BBC” Baxter sounded to modern ears.
I’m quite happy with Crofty, although perhaps he should slow down a bit.
--
Sir Tim
As a Yank, I have to say Croft is an improvement over the old NBC guy, Leigh Diffey. Yes, Croft is excitable, but Diffey was just shrill.
While that is true, both Hobbs and Matchett are missed.
No argument, there. I do miss Hobbs' one-liners and Matchett's tech knowledge, not that Martin Brundle is a dummy.
News
2018-04-09 11:50:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.
I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other, the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
The 'spectacle' is visual and obvious.

No need to foam at the mouth for ignorant imbeciles in the TV audience.
Bobster
2018-04-09 12:16:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Bobster
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.
I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other, the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
The 'spectacle' is visual and obvious.
No need to foam at the mouth for ignorant imbeciles in the TV audience.
Depends on whether you're trying to reach out to a few snotty anoraks who know it all already, or a greater audience that you'd like to hook and hold onto.

Croft's job isn't really to keep the denizens of RASF1 happy.
News
2018-04-09 12:21:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by News
Post by Bobster
Post by John
Everytime the action gets fast the main announcer becomes completely not understandable.
Shades of Murray Walker.
I am split by such issues. On the one hand I wish they'd take a deep breath, collect themselves and give the actual information. On the other, the breathlessness and trying to fit more words into the time available than it can hold invokes the excitement of sport.
The 'spectacle' is visual and obvious.
No need to foam at the mouth for ignorant imbeciles in the TV audience.
Depends on whether you're trying to reach out to a few snotty anoraks who know it all already, or a greater audience that you'd like to hook and hold onto.
Croft's job isn't really to keep the denizens of RASF1 happy.
Yet the rest have no idea what he's foaming about.
Loading...