uk f1 tv coverage - sky, bbc and ch4

[Adam43]

Umbrellas are what do it for me. That and free email addresses.

[chillibowl]

umbrellas are nice. ultimately i settled for a VW who kindly threw in a free cross country ski bag and a set of customized winter mats for my car and considering winter is what we do here i thought that was a both a nice bit of value added as well as being very practical.

getting back on topic i do have an axe to grind with the way the Canadian market is getting cut up by the cable companies.

for example, F1 in Canada is broadcast by TSN which is owned by BELL Canada.

so in addition to being a cable provider (one on many in Canada) they are also one of the larger mobile phone providers, and owner of several tv networks and sports teams in Canada...so a huge vertically and horizontally integrated telecom.

now Bell is required/or has made deals to make TSN available to all cable providers (via the TV) but what they have so far refused to do is make that content available online (either on the internet or through mobile data) to any tv subscriber who is not also a subscriber to their mobile services.

while this sounds unfair it must be noted that the cell phone provider i have (Rogers Communications) has just acquired the rights to broadcast the NHL for i think the next ten years and they will now probably do something similar to hockey fans which i will receive an advantage

oddly both Rogers and Bell are 30% owners of the Maple Leaf Sports group which owns the following teams, Toronto Maple leafs (NHL), Toronto Raptors (NBA), and Toronto FC (MLS)...naturally fans on any of these teams have been caught in the middle.

this may explain why i am a believer of an a la carte or PPV model because in the end it is a cheaper method for me than having to carry multiple cable or mobile packages with multiple companies.

again our market place is very different then on your side of the pond (i Believe), FTA is never going to be a real option here, and our future is one of this dying industry trying to carve the market up by sports leagues and individual franchises in order to make as much money as possible before the gov't steps in and stops them from carving up the market in such a predatory and monopolyesque fashion.

so i pay CAN$150.00 plus tax a month to get HD cable and home internet which includes TSN but no online coverage (i also have to pay an extra 10 for my local NHL teams games - Go Jets!) plus i pay $80 a month for my cell phone (to Rogers) without the ability to live/replay stream races.

the future for me is one where i can drop everything and just pay the mobile phone bill and buy anything i want via an in app purchase (essentially the new PPV model) and stream it to the device of my choice. for me thats the value added.

sorry for the rant but im not sure you guys know how good you have it over there.

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by bella

beg to differ about virgin offering a crap price for a crap product. my uncle has telly, phone, uber high speed internet and everything thrown in with them for an exceptionally reasonable price. you do need to barter though, which is a terribly un-british thing to have to do

Virgin services are ace... when they work. This is rarely the case sadly. I was glad to get back to Sky, three years and the internet has not cut out once (thrice daily at the least with Virgin).

My favourite episode was when they sent an engineer out to fix my broadband and he simply didn't bother to turn up at all, despite receiving texts from him to update me as to precisely when he would be turning up.

Nice and cheap service though (or at least it was in 2010) and their fibre optic interwebz is amazing.

They also come in useful as I can lie to Sky that I am moving to them and they immediately halve my subscription costs.

[Lancsbreaker]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Virgin services are ace... when they work. This is rarely the case sadly. I was glad to get back to Sky, three years and the internet has not cut out once (thrice daily at the least with Virgin).

And this of course is why all these discussions go round in circles.....we all draw definitive conclusions based on our own one-off experience.....We've had Cable Virgin for many years and the only issues we've had have been with a faulty router - replaced without fuss. I wouldn't touch Sky with the proverbial barge-pole because of the rapacious prices they demanded for service at my step-son's pub.

However I don't really expect anybody to make their F1 viewing decision based on this.....

[Knowlesy]

Certainly in my area Virgin have a dire reputation though. It isn't just me. They seem to just be a bargaining tool to go to Sky with.

Definitely can see that if your service is good with them that you'd rave about them. Like I said, what they offer is very good. Sky are just technically superb wherever I have went and worth the slight price hike. And not all that costly at all, unless you start adding sports packages.

Still don't think F1 should be on it though. My heart goes out to those unable to upgrade to it, for technical or funding reasons, for what was once so easy to see. Still, at least it has coincided with a low point in F1 's history.

[chunterer]

We've got Sky, not sure which package exactly, but for the telly, broadband and phoneline it's about 20 quid cheaper than Virgin was which I've never quite got my head around!

With Virgin we had some set top box and package issues in a 10 year period and with Sky we had 2 set tops within the first 6 months, so I'm glad we are paying less.

Overall though the Sky product 'feels' better and there is more choice but to be honest the only reason we bought it was because we couldn't have Cable in the area we moved to even though it was only 3 miles away from the old pad.

[garcon]

Unfortunately my street isn't cabled, which denies me the choice of rejecting Virgin on general grounds of cost and incompetence.

Instead, I shall no doubt upgrade to BT Infinity ... despite the cost and incompetence.

[Lancsbreaker]

Friends I know who have BT Infinity are very complimentary about it.....but of course because I live in a Virgin cabled area we're very low down on the schedule for introduction of Infinity.......

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by garcon

Unfortunately my street isn't cabled, which denies me the choice of rejecting Virgin on general grounds of cost and incompetence.

Instead, I shall no doubt upgrade to BT Infinity ... despite the cost and incompetence.

Bring on Infinity. I neither live in a big city or in the middle of nowhere so am no ones priority.

[djinvicta]

Ooohh. Just got Sky Go on lap top and I Pad which includes Sky F1 , Movies and loads of other channels, Dave etc in France. £20 a month.

[henners88]

Hope you have better luck with it than I have. I live in Wales with fast broadband and had terrible buffering problems, not that this was accepted as being a negative observation here. I wasn't the only person though, Sky's forum is full of people who had the same complaint when trying to watch football. Been using streams ever since.

[Born Racer]

I had a lot of buffering watching Sky online even with a quick broadband speed.

I liked the fact Sky don't make you call India, but I didn't think much of the F1 channel.

[Peter Mallett]

I don't subscribe to Sky but I do use iPlayer which spent ages buffering. Also we found that our BT hub was dropping out on a regular basis. We now have windows 8 software on new laptops and the problem has gone away. This is also true for when I stream items in overseas locations. So, it may be that the wi fi modems are no longer compatible with the computers/tablets that are being used.

[garcon]

Buffering is a reception issue, not a Sky (or any other provider) transmission issue.

Sort the problems out at your end - as it appears Pete did - and lo and behold, no buffering!

[henners88]

Originally Posted by garcon

Buffering is a reception issue, not a Sky (or any other provider) transmission issue.

Sort the problems out at your end - as it appears Pete did - and lo and behold, no buffering!

Rubbish. There is nothing wrong with my fibre optic broadband or the laptop and iPad I have been using to receive it. The buffering and maintenance messages I have had in Sky Go have been Sky's problem, not mine. There is a simple solution, not use it and use a stream that 'lo and behold' doesn't buffer or drop out. Just sharing my experience.

[garcon]

Originally Posted by henners88

Rubbish.

Nice. Classy. Try having a bit of ****ing respect why don't you?

There is nothing wrong with my fibre optic broadband ....

Yours? Really? You pay for it do you? I thought you just stole 'free' stuff - you know, like illegal streams.

Just sharing my experience.

The internet is full of people 'sharing' their experience. After a while one learns to choose which 'experience' to believe.

[henners88]

With respect I will suggest you calm down and stop getting so personal. I haven't sworn or been nasty to anybody here and I apologise if my use of the word 'rubbish' offended you. I just don't agree with you and perhaps should have chosen another word.

I do watch illegal streams and use my folks Sky Go ID, but if we are to suggest that is stealing, then so are many things. We only had the right to record in 1984 as before that it was considered stealing. I didn't ask Sky to take F1 and put it on pay TV. I will find a way of watching the sport I love and I have no problem with that. Why should I miss out? And yes I do pay for my broadband, and unlike Sky F1, you have a choice of how much it is and can shop around. With Sky its their price or nothing.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by henners88

Rubbish. There is nothing wrong with my fibre optic broadband or the laptop and iPad I have been using to receive it. The buffering and maintenance messages I have had in Sky Go have been Sky's problem, not mine. There is a simple solution, not use it and use a stream that 'lo and behold' doesn't buffer or drop out. Just sharing my experience.

If you are connecting to your router with wireless, it will always give you reduced speed over a wired connection and buffering can still occur despite using fibre optic broadband. Try hardwiring the connection.

[henners88]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

If you are connecting to your router with wireless, it will always give you reduced speed over a wired connection and buffering can still occur despite using fibre optic broadband. Try hardwiring the connection.

Yeah I used to do that when I used my laptop on my TV. I could log in to Sky Go and plug the laptop in with an Ethernet cable. My laptop would then be connected via HDMI to the TV and I was getting a decent picture. The buffering wasn't my only issue on wireless. During one race the Sky Go page went down for maintenance and I read from others they had this issue. We missed about a quarter of a race. I've been more lazy now and not bothered with a cable as my new house is laid out differently and I don't have a cable long enough. I don't get issues with streams though but I suppose its a totally different transmission. I will give Sky Go another shot this year and see how it works out

[henners88]

I also haven't figured out how to plug an Ethernet cable into an iPad yet lol. Just thinking about the speed drop. How many MB do you lose on wireless? Surely even with a slight loss, the Sky Go app won't be demanding 40 or more MB to receive consistent streaming?

[LC2guy]

Up till now i have to say i am extremely happy with the Sky F1 Channel. Maybe its because i grew up in the Hill, Brundle, Herbert era, and i find them all entertaining in different ways. I like the Legends Series, i catch a few GP2 races now and again, the F1 show is a good little weekly magazine, i am half way through watching all the team round-ups from 2013 that started before xmas, i will watch the Jerez test round-ups each evening next week and i have the option to watch all the Qualifying and Grand Prix live, so i have nothing to complain about. I do, however, recieve it at no extra cost at present, as it was added free of charge to my existing package 2 years ago. My fear is what will happen when the BBC sign off. This will surely happen, as remember, Sky didn't Steal F1 from the BBC, the BBC wanted to off-load it, and chose not to deal with Free to Air channels. Maybe i'll be back on here moaning when that happens, but for now, its all good. I feel for those who can't justify ( financially or morally ) subscribing, as we are all F1 fans, but it really is the BBC who placed us all where we are now, sky saw an opportunity and took it. Perhaps my only gripe is that the Mrs gets fed up with half the planner full of F1 shows !!!! I then have to stay home while she goes shopping, crack open a beer and catch up for a few hours, just to make a bit of room on the planner for Corrie ...... All In my opinion of course ( which i am entitled to, as is everyone else ).

[henners88]

The BBC do have a lot to answer for as ideally all the coverage would be on C4 now had their offer been entertained. They may not have been able to offer the same quality of coverage as Sky, but at least all F1 fans would have had an equal chance of watching it live and legitimately. Sky is fantastic if you can justify the price and although I could afford it at a big stretch, I think 43 quid of my money would be better spent elsewhere as my wife is still on maternity leave and my pay isn't great. It's entertainment at the end of the day but I don't watch any other sport and F1 really is my only piece of enjoyment and I will find a way to watch it. I don't really fit into Sky's viewer model. I'm a professional skilled worker who earns under the national average, has children and a mortgage. I'm not wealthy and I'm also not on benefits so I have to prioritise what I spend. I simply can't justify that much money for one channel to watch half an F1 season. Anyway I've said that before and it's by the by, but I get the impression I shouldn't be allowed to watch it based on my position and I think that is wrong. If my father pays £60 a month to Sky for his package and uses no portable devices, but says to me I can use his logins, why is that wrong? I rarely use them in any case as weekends are usually spent doing productive things and F1 for me is avoiding results and catching up. I think I watched 2 or 3 Sky races last year and to be honest the BBC highlights are adequate viewing for most F1 fans. It's just nice to see it in full and live if I get the chance. It's no big deal and my father is toying with the idea of leaving Sky after 18 years very soon so i'll most likely lose my Sky Go access. I won't lose sleep over it though

[chunder]

Wholeheartedly agree henners.

Couldnt have put it betetr myself.

I too have often had issues with Skygo by the way, I think perhaps it is because you are often streaming a larger image, I have a 25 in monitor, and can atream movies etc on smallish boxes fine, but F1 on BEEB or sky go for say footie live if sometimes buffers

I think it is simply the device and the size of the image you are streaming relativeto you broadband, I am on fibre and a 25in screen pushing HD down a 30 meg line sometimes struggle!

[henners88]

That would explain it, thanks chunder glad I'm not going mad

[LC2guy]

Originally Posted by henners88

If my father pays £60 a month to Sky for his package and uses no portable devices, but says to me I can use his logins, why is that wrong?

Absolutely nothing wrong with that as far as i can see, both my sons do the same.

Its horses for courses really, but don't assume that just because someone has Sky that they aren't " Productive ". When i was younger, had a mortgage and the Mrs was on Maternity leave, like you i couldn't justify the time or the money, but things change as you get older, and if you are lucky they get a little easier. I watch all the F1 stuff with my 2 sons, but far from being couch potatoes as some may insinuate, we spend most of our lives going from one activity to another, so downtime watching what i am passionate about is ok in my books. In a couple of years when F1 is PPV only i'll get the boys to pay