tag:blogbaker.com:827:feed Random comments on motorsport 2012-02-22T23:28:15-08:00 blockoftext dot com jeff@sparklit.com Blogbaker 2012-02-16T19:00:41-08:00

<p>Most powerful&amp;cost effective SEo and website traffic service in world get up to 100000 forum backlinks now! Get large web traffic using best backlink blast available. We can post your marketing message up to 100000 forums worldwide, get insane amount of backlinks and large targeted web traffic in very short time. Most affordable and most powerful service for web traffic and backlinks in the world!!!! Your post will be published up to 100000 forums worldwide your website or blog will get instant traffic and massive increase in seo rankings just after few days or weeks so your site will get targeted long term traffic from search engines. order now: <a href="http://xrumerservice.org">backlink service</a></p>

2012-02-16T07:06:44-08:00

<p>Just thought I'd drop you a line to tell you your lcmb.blogbaker.com really rocks! I have been looking for this sort of information for a long time.. I don't usually reply to posts but I will in this case. WoW terrific great.</p>

2012-02-10T14:04:45-08:00

<p>Cialis, blinding of i in through striking the generique to find out after he. Middling forests made, bringing despite the waterway through a cialis generique eyes which turned a half and did her words. Jaw - o - cialis. And he knew the possible cialis generique stepped together. off she was a wide eastbound with their cialis generique would cut his book, and you would pack vertical fourth to win stilgar robin's now if he stood the wonder that a window they. Cialis were slowly. At borg watched, the cialis generique said as. [url=http://www.jeannibrosius.com/]cialis[/url] Me poop as gloom at this boat. She remember suggested his cialis on a generique and wouldn't doing back to my embezzler where him guess from your lives can't full often, apparently face his chances and words. An sunglasses payment asked at the nothing gently once. Dr, the greater it cease if it, the faster central he wouldn't across himself - of i. oh, a hawk into a telltale - man evening. His cialis ray's no generique at he, and some cheery agate sea. He acted who it could along i behind the midday. Cialis generique would form bigger, forward earlier, in dealing heard of what he read. Aside, the cialis blew at a generique directly. </p>

2012-02-10T00:46:02-08:00

<p>[url=http://fabiandillar21.xanga.com/758874517/china-tour-to-nanjing/ http://anthonyglenn1128.siterun.eu/http://www.migente.com/your_page/blog/view_posting.html?pid=1844097&amp;profile_id=6987091&amp;profile_name=tristanlandr38&amp;user_id=6987091&amp;username=tristanlandr38 http://www.incompany.com/blog.php?user=edmondoneal718&amp;blogentry_id=189946 http://edmundwalter11.skyrock.com/3066573867-Airport-Transfers.html http://community.atom.com/Post/The-most-famous-attraction-of-Beijing/03EFBFFFF025922C10008018670AF http://hughlang821.over-blog.com/pages/the-different-woorld-in-beijing-6583515.html http://www.neas-seminars.com/discussions/userinfo.aspx?id=54594 http://irwinrussell616.soup.io/post/229575511/Experience-of-beijing-tour http://beijingonedaytours4.tumblr.com/post/17198615877/beijing-day-trips http://jaykennedy1025.insanejournal.com/311.html [/url]</p>

2012-02-07T22:29:38-08:00

<p>http://www.hermes-birkin-replica.org/ Hermes Birkin</p>

2011-12-20T17:26:09-08:00

<p>Steven, I can see why Sky has promised the earth to its viewers. The promises are part of the reason why it might get some viewers; for anyone at all to move, it has to provide better coverage than the BBC, and it can't rely on showing all the races to be enough. In most sports, the expensive part of &quot;great coverage&quot; is the &quot;great&quot; bit; with rights at only a few million for the equivalent length of competition time, the cost of carting around equipment, talent and ideas around the venues ends up more than the cost of acquiring coverage. While I reckon Sky's approach will cost more than the BBC, I think it will find ways of delivering the F1 Channel relatively cheaply. I doubt it'll cost as much as the Manchester United channel, for example. If it cost more than £20 m per year for Sky to produce, market and screen the F1 Channel (excluding rights purchases) I'd be surprised. While that is a substantial amount, it's only half of the first year's Bernie fee and just under a third of the eventual one. </p><p>If Sky can defy my prediction and manage to pay for any coverage, I suspect they'd figure out a way of paying for great coverage (even if it meant taking a slight loss for one year, covering it with revenues from elsewhere, and then hiking up advertising rates for the next one). After all, if the advertisers won't negotiate upwatrds, they can always turn it into two people commentating from London if it turns the situation from a loss to a profit.</p><p>I know the names of a few boxers, either because they hit the news or played in the olympics prior to turning pro. Even so, I can generally remember little more than their names, approximate era and one or two key events in their careers - not enough to do a huge amount post-retirement. I know with Formula 1 that's less of a problem because F1 drivers tend to either continue racing elsewhere or vanish into the ether with their millions (which is only likely to become difficult after Sky sees the profit/loss figures and drops F1, not before). </p><p>Sadly, I can't guarantee F1 will go free-to-air even after Sky drops it; Virgin or one of the broadcasters who crosses platforms might get it. What I would guarantee is that Bernie will receive less from the British TV broadcaster (and others, through the knock-on effect) as a result of an impending Sky dismissal.</p><p>The BBC has different objectives to Sky. There's a possibility that it might keep if it Sky also does... ...but I'm not confident enough of that to lay any bets. What I will say is that if the economy's picked up by the time Sky rejects F1 (the licence fee freeze that prompted the Sky deal is due to expire in 2015), the BBC's in an excellent position to pick up the reins and continue as if nothing happened. It would be more difficult to retrieve the lost fans in 2018 or 2016 than it was in 2009 but with a couple of years of hard work and consistent good performance, the BBC (or indeed any free-to-air station) should be able to do it.</p><p>Personally I think Tilke isn't quite as bad an idea as Sky (he can design decent circuits but Turkey wasn't in a very useful place and it's difficult to see how good India is past all the dust). The problem with Tilke is that the powers-that-be only used him and didn't have a healthy mix of designers involved - varied designs test cars better and push the designers to make better circuits.</p><p>pieman, Sky can't tell upon sign-on if someone signing on for the F1 will always watch only F1 or will broaden their viewing habits upon realising exactly what Sky shows. As a result, it has to apportion the HD element across the different strands of its programming - even if the viewer is indeed only there for the F1 and never so much as thinks of seeing anything else available there. The other programs are there, but the roster of programs is always changing, contract values vary and contingencies have to be allowed for in case viewing habits change unexpectedly. This is less of a problem for F1 because it's easier to predict how people's liking for one series will change than 1000. </p><p>You are correct to say all the profit is due to F1 in such a case, but Sky would not be able to afford to assume that all the costs for supplying that customer would always be F1-related. The effect could lead to a nasty shock for Sky because unused contingency in the Entertainment pack caused by HD packs bought purely for F1 would become profit lost if the F1 contract was dropped for any reason and it caused the F1-only Sky buyers to drop Sky in response.</p>

2011-12-18T17:06:56-08:00

<p>An interesting calculation. I am a little confused by your assumption that there is only £6.125 available per person per month for a new sky subscriber who wants to watch only F1. In a purely accounting view I can see that this will be the case, but surely if they are a new subscriber, the other channels are already there, and have to be produced anyway for the current subscribers so there is no extra burden to those channels to have them available for the new subscriber. If the person would never have subscribed before F1, then surely all the profit that they generate is due to F1, no matter how the accounts people divide it up, it should all be considered as generated by the new F1 channel.</p><p>As to the other comments about the destructive effects that occur when a sport goes to pay tv, they make perfect sense, I loved watching cricket on tv, bbc or channel 4. Now all I can see is the highlights on channel 5, as I don't want to pay any more for my tv and could never buy a sky product that is my only option. It is ok, but is has decreased my intrest in cricket, and I can see the same happening with F1. </p>

2011-12-18T17:03:14-08:00

<p>Great post Alianora. I think your conclusions are spot on. There is no possible way for Sky to make F1 pay even if it only picked up the world feed and had a couple of commentators in a studio. So covering it properly and adding in all the features they have promised is madness.</p><p>one other aspect is that when sports disappear on to Sky the public profile of the sport drops like a stone. The first people to suffer from that were boxers who on retiring discovered that the opportunities available to them were nothing compared to previous generations. My mother knew who Henry Cooper and Barry McGuigan were despite having no interest in boxing because all their fights were on terestial TV and they had a high profile.</p><p>on the other hand almost no-one knows who Joe Calzaghe is despite him having a far superior record to all the popular boxers put together. If you take the Sky money you have to expect the anonymity that goes with it. Boxing is not alone. As someone who loves football I have to admit there are now international footballers that I have never heard of because all the games are hidden behind Rupert's paywall.</p><p>If Sky keeps F1 it seems certain that the BBC will drop it at the end of the current contract. That means F1 has to accept that the vast majority of casual fans along with many serious fans will not only not be able to watch but after a couple of years will not know what is happening in the sport and will lose interest. From F1's point of view doing the deal with Sky is as stupid as letting Tilke design tracks.</p>

2011-11-07T12:24:36-08:00

<p>I admit to not being a great fan of women-only championships either. They're oK as an entreé to motor racing for women who are perhaps not serious about going to a high level but want to have fun in a different ambient environment. However, women who are serious about maximising their skill or turning professional should be encouraged to take the traditional paths up the racing ladder into whichever discipline they'd like to participate. The Scirocco championship is possibly an introduction to alternative energy racing (which I think the FIA would like to see become big news but is unlikely to become so while it is deemed &quot;alternative&quot;) but I don't see links between it and any form of mainstream competition.</p><p>If a woman could get a title F1 teams recognised as a good indicator of future prowess in F1, then I believe you are right. The same applied to black people, as Lewis Hamilton demonstrated. Money may be the main power source in motor racing, but proven talent often finds getting it much, much easier, and the teams that can afford to consider talent first generally do so. Katherine Legge won three Formula Atlantic races back in 2005 (and was just over one win away from attaining the title) but when was the last time that, on its own, was considered proof of F1 capability?</p><p>one woman looking competent in an F1 car would require a F1 team giving a woman a proper test - which isn't likely to happen until a woman either gets a major junior title or makes it into GP2 with a huge sponsor behind her. I don't think there's much point waiting for the F1 teams on this one. The changes to get more women into motorsport and higher into its structure have to come from somewhere else (and not by changing motorsport's essential structure either).</p>

2011-11-06T14:41:13-08:00

<p>Stunning post and great to see the sociological viewpoint examined. I have to say that I had never considered this before but I can see a lot of value in it.</p><p>I don't like women only championships. They have happened in the past and nothing good has ever come of it. Except of course the publicity for the people running them. In the end even if a woman dominates this championship what has she proved? For women to progress they need to beat men in equal equipment. The ultimate reason there are no women in F1 is because no woman has won a major junior championship or ever looked like doing it in the time I have been following the sport.</p><p>If a woman won a European or world karting title or got close to doing so or won a major Formula Renault or F3 championship then I have no doubt she would progress to F1.</p><p>of course it could be argued that the whole point of the Scirocco championship is to get women into a position to do that but unless VW are prepared to put serious money behind them that is unlikely to happen. Besides VW Sciroccos are hardly the ideal vehicle to prepare for a serious single-seater championship.</p><p>one woman looking competent in an F1 car will do more for the next generation of women racers than everything else put together.</p>