|
|
|
|
|
Topic: Sprints and Live TV
|
Email this topic to a friend |
Subscribe to this Topic
| Report this Topic to Moderator
|
|
Page 2 of 2 of 26 replies
|
|
|
|
|
March 05, 2010 at
08:58:54 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/02/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
77
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Dryslick Willie on March 05 2010 at 06:38:40 AM
I've said this before on other threads including one recently and I'll say it again. Sprint car racing will never go over on TV. I've heard many people say that we have to get it going on TV if sprint car racing will take it to the next level. Sprint car racing will never take it to the next level and it will never go over in a big way on TV no matter what anyone does. The reason should be obvious to anyone. Only us diehard sprint car fans will watch it. Noone who isn't already a racing fan will watch it. This leads to another question, would someone become a racing fan by seeing one of these telecasts on TV? Obviously not! You don't get the sensation of speed on TV nor any of the atmosphere that exists at a big race. You have to go to the track to experience it. Sorry to bust anyone's bubble, but sprint car racing on TV is never going to be a big thing.
|
I agree with you 100 percent. While we love Sprint Car racing the rest of the world is just not interested. The sponsorship dollars aren't there for live broadcasts because the TV ratings suck. One of the reasons that the ratings are so low is that there really isn't much actual racing on any given night. Do the math, if you run 4 heats, a semi, a couple of dashes and the feature you might get 90 laps of green flag racing. At a conservative 20 seconds per lap that adds up to 30 minutes of action. We diehards are okay with having that spread out over a couple of hours but the casual fan or newbie is not. (That's also why there aren't many younger fans. Times have changed). Tape-delayed coverage is the only way Sprint Cars on TV will ever work and even that is a financial risk. It's all about the ratings. It's unfortunate but shows about "pimping rides"' guessing "pass times" and anything NASCAR have higher ratings than our favorite sport. It's really that simple.
|
|
|
|
|
March 06, 2010 at
02:17:07 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
08/15/2007
|
|
Posts:
|
135
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Rick Eaton on March 05 2010 at 08:58:54 AM
I agree with you 100 percent. While we love Sprint Car racing the rest of the world is just not interested. The sponsorship dollars aren't there for live broadcasts because the TV ratings suck. One of the reasons that the ratings are so low is that there really isn't much actual racing on any given night. Do the math, if you run 4 heats, a semi, a couple of dashes and the feature you might get 90 laps of green flag racing. At a conservative 20 seconds per lap that adds up to 30 minutes of action. We diehards are okay with having that spread out over a couple of hours but the casual fan or newbie is not. (That's also why there aren't many younger fans. Times have changed). Tape-delayed coverage is the only way Sprint Cars on TV will ever work and even that is a financial risk. It's all about the ratings. It's unfortunate but shows about "pimping rides"' guessing "pass times" and anything NASCAR have higher ratings than our favorite sport. It's really that simple.
|
If you're that worried about time, then why not do what they use to do.... SHOW THE A/B's LIVE... and to fill the other hour you can show highlights/or tape delayed heats. My main problem with this is the whole wait days/weeks/months to watch a race. I'd be fine if they did show it the next afternoon and I feel more sponsors would also be more interested in putting money into the programs if they did this.
|
|
|
|
|
March 07, 2010 at
08:56:08 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/02/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
77
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Racefan22_7 on March 06 2010 at 02:17:07 PM
If you're that worried about time, then why not do what they use to do.... SHOW THE A/B's LIVE... and to fill the other hour you can show highlights/or tape delayed heats. My main problem with this is the whole wait days/weeks/months to watch a race. I'd be fine if they did show it the next afternoon and I feel more sponsors would also be more interested in putting money into the programs if they did this.
|
Potential sponsors don't care about tape delays. They only care about the number of people watching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 07, 2010 at
10:44:32 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
08/15/2007
|
|
Posts:
|
135
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Rick Eaton on March 07 2010 at 08:56:08 AM
Potential sponsors don't care about tape delays. They only care about the number of people watching.
|
And you don't think you'd have more viewers for a live show?
|
|
|
|
|
March 08, 2010 at
10:46:07 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/30/2008
|
|
Posts:
|
4
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: vande77 on March 04 2010 at 03:12:42 PM
Want to know why Knoxville isn't being shown live? It's pretty simple really. People were traveling to K'ville and watching Wednesday and Thursday live in the grandstand, driving back home on Friday and then watching Saturday night in front of the TV.
IMO, doing away with the Live TV is good for Knoxville, (don't know about the WoO yet, as they only have 2-3 live shows per year, and with the exception of Williams Grove, have the standard Outlaw payout so the promoter doesn't have to sell out to make a ton of $$$ ($30 x 14,000 @ Lowe's = $420,000 in ticket revenue for $54,000 purse, that's a good ratio.
Knoxville, $44 Saturday night ticket (average since they have 3 tier ticket pricing) x 25,000 (if sold out) = $1,100,000 with Saturday purse of $670,250 (not near the ratio of profit (and that's if they sell out).
Due to purse structure, Knoxville has less margin, reduce the # of butts in teh seats to 15,000 and the ticket revenue = $660,000 vs the purse of $670,250 (the track is actually taking a loss in this scenario before the electric bill, water bill, security, employees, etc.). Better sell a ton of beer and concessions and hope to make up the $$.
Lowe's can have 7000 in attendance (50% capacity) x $30 ticket and they still gross $210,000, with the same $54000 purse structure.
Basically, Lowe's has more room for attendance to drop before financially they think TV is hurting them. IMO, Knoxville reacted too late, Live TV should have been gone 5-6 years ago as the last time there was a real "demand for tickets" was in 2000 or so before they added on the skyboxes on teh frontstretch. Once they quit selling out Saturday night in advance, they should have went to tape delay.
Just my $.02
|
Please don't forget about the sponsorship dollars that Knoxville brings in for the Nationals. My guess is it is probably at least equal to their ticket sales if not better.
|
|
|
|
|
March 08, 2010 at
12:53:57 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
01/20/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
2079
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: JAD on March 08 2010 at 10:46:07 AM
Please don't forget about the sponsorship dollars that Knoxville brings in for the Nationals. My guess is it is probably at least equal to their ticket sales if not better.
|
If you think a sponsor will shell out the same amount of $$ that the track would bring in on ticket sales, you are crazy. But I'll use your logic to show how crazy it is.
Knoxville, 25,000 seats - Sponsor would pay $150 (below average ticket price for 4 days) per person in attendance for sponsorship of the event = $3.75 million - total purse $1,000,000.
I'd say it's more in the neighborhood of $1 per seat/night which puts it at ~$100,000 in total sponsorship to be the title sponsor of the Nationals.
Why would you spend $3.75 million when if you sign a 3 year deal, you could build your own racetrack, be your own sponsor, get Live TV, pay a big purse ($1,000,000), which attracts the race teams and fans (supposedly), and end up not spending a dime at the end of the 3 years (you'd be making the same amount of $$ through ticket sales by your logic).
Plus, how could these companies constitute sponsoring a big NASCAR event if the price structure was as you suggest? 200,000 seats @ Daytona or Texas x $100 (average ticket price) = $20.000.000 in sponsorship on a race with $9,000,000.
Maybe I'm the one that's nuts, but I know the company I work for would NEVER pay out more $$ than what they think the return would be (for Goodyear, that'd be relying on the 10,000 people at the track that night to all buy new tires ($400) to generate $3.75 million in revenue (not profit, revenue only). Would more than likely take 50,000 people to all buy new tires (which would generate $20,000,000 in revenue) to recuperate thier $3,750,000 investment back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 08, 2010 at
04:00:55 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/07/2006
|
|
Posts:
|
5703
|
|
|
|
Who wants to sit home and watch Sprint Cars on television when there are races to go to, cold beer to drink and good friends to hang around with? 
That's what separates Sprint Car fans from the masses. Most people sit home and watch their sports on television and might go to an occasional NFL game or NASCAR race but for the most part they're couch potatoes. Dirt track racing fans, we like our sports hands on, get out there and experience the sights, sounds and smells. I can barely watch any sports on television anymore, it bores me, but I love being at the Sprint Car races. If I wasn't actually attending races every weekend all summer I'd probably lose interest and walk away from it. Dirt track racing is about being there, plain and simple. Television, the internet, it's a good way to see photos, get results and listen to driver interviews or watch youtube clips but all that is just a teaser to hold a person over until the next race.
Stan Meissner
|
|
|
|
