Alonso keeps eye on the prize
SPLIT: SPANIARD FINALLY SEVER HIS TIES WITH MCLAREN IN SEARCH OF ELUSIVE TRIPLE CROWN
Gifted Spaniard won four times in his 95 Grands Prix for Woking-based team.
It came as no surprise when it was announced last week that Fernando Alonso and McLaren are to part company. Just eleven months ago Alonso was appointed as an ambassador for the Woking-based team.
Recent activities such as Le Mans drives and the Dakar Rally, both for Toyota, seemed to indicate that the double world F1 champion has other targets.
That elusive Indianapolis 500 win must be one – something that prevents the 38-year-old Spaniard from completing the Triple Crown. That honour belongs to the late Graham Hill, who took the crown in 1972.
Perhaps Toyota will develop a possible Indy 500 contender and allow Alonso to become the second man to complete the very difficult triple.
Competing in 95 Grands Prix for McLaren over five seasons, Alonso took victory for them on four occasions, accumulating 241 points in the process.
Miami, the all important “destination city”, is still pushing for an F1 race.
Despite objections from residents and comments from many in the F1 world it appears that Miami-Dade mayor Carlos Gimenez, with CEO of the Hard Rock Stadium Tom Garfinkel, are determined to host a round of the F1.
A revised track design which eliminates some problems, including changing practice start times to prevent disruption at schools and “scientific evidence” that proves it will not create health issues for the residents, are part of the attempt to secure the race.
This is a prime example of wanting to bring Formula One to the people, when the people have indicated they do not want it.
That apart, I am confused. In mid-December, F1 Chief Chase Carey complained the sport was difficult to follow due to “too many complicated penalties and rules”.
He is reported as saying. “We have got a 100-page regulation book. We must get the business to a place where it is easier to follow and has fewer complexities that fans out there cannot follow.”
Then, mid-January, we were informed by F1 “that for the third consecutive year, the sport grew its audience figures, across both TV and digital platforms, compared with the previous season”.
The report went on to reveal an array of impressive positive growth globally, quoting all sorts of surveys from named rating agencies.
Great stuff, but this is where my confusion sets in.
In approximately one month we have Carey complaining that the rules are all too complicated and it was a turn-off for fans.
Then he announces that after three years and the formation of an expensive marketing team it has all come to naught, as the sport has not attracted any significant series sponsor.
He is reported as saying “the sponsorship world has probably been more challenging than we would have expected it to be a couple of years ago”.
Apparently, the company’s share price is not what was expected and television viewership has dropped significantly since the enforcement of “pay to view” in most countries.
So how is this glowing growth claim made?
Apparently it is all down to the method used to calculate just what “viewership” is.
The method used by Liberty Media to describe a viewer is rather strange in that anyone who watches more than “three consecutive minutes of F1 at any time in the season” is listed as a “unique viewer”.
Not the sort of figure I would have thought describes the real fan of the sport and yet it sets the criteria for the increased growth in television audiences in 2019 for F1.
The introduction of streaming services and timing apps have not been well received due to continual issues with the reliability of such systems resulting in many client refunds.
The claim of increased audiences makes little sense when you consider that in the UK alone the viewership dropped by 8.6 million last year and it seems possible that this is a becoming a global phenomenon.
Several reports indicate a total worldwide loss of 19.2 million viewers.
Perhaps then one can understand the recent news that F1’s managing director of commercial operations, Sean Bratches, has chosen to vacate his position at the end of this month, remaining as a home based consultant for the group.
Rather him than me.
The claim of increased audiences makes little sense when you consider that in the UK alone the viewership dropped by 8.6 million last year.