Brawn offers analogy to stunned F1 TV customers

9
Photo by: www.kymillman.com/f1

There’s an old axiom: shoot twice and aim once. In some ways, that’s what it seems like Formula 1’s new owners have done. Look, there is certainly that understandable moment when some folks buy a company and come in scratching tree trunks to mark their territory. There’s a new sheriff in town…etc.

Piecing together that last 12 months of press releases and comments in the press, I would be daft to suggest that some things Liberty have done, and are trying to do, are not positive or at least met with a positive energy by the teams, fans and stakeholders in F1. There are also decisions being made that seem strange while some are simply off the mark completely.

F1 TV launched last weekend and I won’t mince words here, it failed miserably. F1 sent an apology email to subscribers and I found it interesting that the man in charge isn’t the one speaking to the press about the difficulties. Instead, technical guru Ross Brawn was sought for a quote by the F1 press.

“Apologies to our fans, but we are dragging our sport from a place where none of these initiatives previously existed and we will get there,” added the former Honda, Brawn GP and Mercedes team principal.

“In some ways that’s what Formula One is about, a sport where things are developed on the move and on the track with technology that is always cutting edge” said Brawn.

I have a lot of time for Ross but let me use the most basic F1 analogy to shed some light on how paying customers might feel about F1 TV’s launch.

In F1 it is often said that a driver is ultimately measured and compared to his teammate. Lewis vs Valtteri, Fernando vs Stoffel etc.

The same is true with content creators and delivery systems. For cord-cutters, the F1 streaming performance will naturally be compared to other services they enjoy such as Netflix, Amazon, DirecTv Now, Sony VUE etc. If there is lag, buffering, black screens, constant stoppage and simply no loading, that’s not what the customer experiences, generally speaking, with their other services.

F1 TV was unwatchable last weekend with poor streaming quality, lag, buffering and other issues. There was something else missing too. A series of features they had originally touted and others that fans have been asking for all along. The content wasn’t up to par and neither was the actual performance level of the streaming service.

I appreciate Ross’s sentiment about F1 constantly developing but that’s not how you run a content streaming network. In F1 terms, what F1 provided last weekend was a HALO wing and mirror combination that should be immediately banned.

From content delivery to Content Creation

What caught my attention over a year ago was John Malone’s comments about Liberty not wanting to be just a content delivery system. He knows the money is made in content creation and that’s why they purchased F1. Netflix and Amazon know this too. They didn’t remain as content streaming services for long and now create a lot of their own content. Now they own the complete ecosystem—creation and delivery.

Sean Bratches, once again, called F1 a media company, not just a terrific sport. That supports Malone’s comments as well. As such, it seems they are ushering in several half-baked concepts on content creation and a half-baked content delivery system. Much of it doesn’t seem ready for prime time and some would argue that they should slow down, work on the complete package and shoot for 2021 when the regulations change to make their big moves.

World Copyright: Sam Bloxham/LAT Images
ref: Digital Image _J6I9948

Others might argue that they don’t have the luxury of waiting that long for a host of reasons. Losing viewers in significant numbers, a stagnant set of regulations that a large portion of fans don’t like, processional racing (or at least Merc dominated racing) and employment contracts for both Sean and Chase might all play a part in trying to change F1 sooner than later.

I’m unclear on what F1 as a media company means beyond improving and broadening the reach and footprint of the series. What F1 bosses have continually referenced is other sports and I appreciate that for all the right reasons, but wouldn’t it be better to have all other sports trying to be like F1 instead? Why buy F1 and spin your wheels with failed launches and other cheap parlor tricks trying to play the game? Why not just change the game?

Right now, the F1 TV service failed to remotely get close to simply equaling the NFL or other services in order to play the game so maybe actually having the resources to change the game completely is unrealistic. Sure, you have to start somewhere and perhaps just getting a decent stream up and going is a good first step.

I’ll be honest, if what F1 TV is shooting for is the Sky Sports F1 broadcast commentary with the ability to change onboard cameras? That’s not a game-changer and not worth $99. The archived races? That’s great but not all of them are on the service.

There is a lot of work to do and I’m cheering them on because I want it to work. There are a host of tings I believe should be added and changed in order to make the $99 worth the price of admission. Right now, I feel like Mr. Bratches is taking the watch off our wrist and telling us what time it is.

I thought the F1 TV Pro package would have its own commentary crew, all-new camera angles and graphics taking us deeper into the sport, superior video and audio quality and on-demand replay with synchronized timing and scoring so fans could experience the entirety of an F1 race whenever they wanted. We are a long, long way from my expectations and I fear I’m not alone in these expectations either.

Hat Tip: Reuters

Leave a Reply

9 Comments on "Brawn offers analogy to stunned F1 TV customers"

avatar
 
Photo and Image Files
 
 
 
Audio and Video Files
 
 
 
Other File Types
 
 
 
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Trever Braun
Guest
Trever Braun
This whole situation feels like the bosses are working ahead of the staff and not taking a whole lot of feedback, and their so far apart that some basic functions have ceased. I can imagine Sean saying “I want us on streaming.” Staff says “um, yeah. We’re not set up for that, and we need to source some talent and tools, then rent some infrastructure.” Sean says “good, I’ll tweet that it’ll be live in 3 weeks. The fans love will love it.” Their efforts are not insincere or misplaced, but they need to get realistic. And as you point… Read more »
Member
No need to mention Netflix or Amazon. Youtube TV would be a direct comparison for F1 TV’s service. The DVR for my Meetup group failed to record the race properly. I hooked up my laptop, and brought up the ESPN channel on the service. The stream worked flawlessly. I had held off from signup for F1 TV after everyone’s comments on its lagging during FP1. Now I have to make a decision between F1 TV’s archival footage vs Youtube TV’s streaming all kinds of movies, TV shows, and 2-3 of the most recent races. And it’s not just F1 either.… Read more »
Rapierman
Member
Rapierman

And this is why I wouldn’t have gone for that package even if I were a millionaire. Turn a sport into a media company? The word “clusterflop” comes to mind. Carey and Bratches should have kept their mouths shut from the beginning and should have only announced it when all the bugs are ironed out. If you’re trying to make a fast buck, you will fail most of the time.

Fabio
Member
Fabio

‘clusterflop’, that’s clearly the polite version? coz that’s not the phrase I know and love.

subcritical71
Member
subcritical71
I had a feeling the weekend would not go well. They are going from 0 to 100 and forgetting they need to know how to crawl first. I don’t really believe with the size of the F1 audience that anyone could have pulled off this feat without issues. Now, what I would like to have seen them do is offer the service as a beta, with a realistic number of testers to approximate what the final subscriber base is believed to be. That way they could claim beta, fix their issues, and deliver a final product that works. I work… Read more »
mrvco
Guest
mrvco

Liberty should have licensed the VideoPass platform that MotoGP uses for a year and bought themselves some time.

subcritical71
Member
subcritical71

I heard on another podcast that there were people who figured out that the video stream was going out unencrypted also, so if you knew the proper URL you could have gotten it for free. If this is true then it really is a bit of amateur hour for them. Not that I mind, if I could get my hands on an unencrypted live timing feed that would be awesome for a project I’m working on!

mrvco
Guest
mrvco
It is true, you could copy the m3u8 url out of the browser (dev console or view source) and play it in VLC… and apparently this was far more reliable than using the default player in the browser. The more I think about it, the more amazed I am that Liberty dropped this ball so badly by both being late and by failing so miserably when they did launch ‘something’. It’s not like this is unexplored territory, MotoGP is a perfect example (multi-camera, browser, IOS and Android apps) but WRC has been live streaming their events as well. It is… Read more »
Jimmi
Guest
Jimmi
I am one of the unfortunates–Americans who have happened upon Eurocentric sports and fallen hard for them. I like cycling. I like tennis. I like Formula 1. I like WRC etc. So I know more about streaming–legal, quasi-legal, and totally illegal–than most. I am pretty sure I know where the state of the art is for live streaming. And the problem is the same for all sports. On Sunday (or on Saturday if one is watching, say, the Queen stage of the Giro d’Italia as I am doing today on Eurosport Player) the live stream is asked to serve millions… Read more »