I remember when Champ Car left SPEED saying they didn't want to be second fiddle to what had originally been planned as a 24-hour NASCAR channel. How'd that turn out?
I remember when Champ Car left SPEED saying they didn't want to be second fiddle to what had originally been planned as a 24-hour NASCAR channel. How'd that turn out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Helix-
Maybe it will work!! I hope you're right on all of that....
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Well I've had the channel for about three years now. It used to be the "Outdoor Life Network".
I've seen PBR, Hockey, A1GP?? and a whole lot of hunting shows!! Some Cage Fighting.
Dennis Miller has a sports show on it!
I have been watching Versus and before the name change the Outdoor Life Channel for years. The way they cover the Tour de France is absolutly stunning and I believe they will do justice to IndyCar. With the increased coverage for races and special programming, IndyCar could become their flagship. The viewers who watch programming on Versus are a wide demographic. From bike racing fans to Hockey to Cagefighting to Bullriding to the America's Cup, you cannot get much more diverse, and many of which I'm sure will flock to IndyCar. Now if they can just replace Marty and Scott.
The same network that went to a paid infomercial during NHL playoffs last year. Hockey fans were unable to see the fourth overtime in which Henrik Sedin scored the winning goal in Game 1 of the Western Conference quarterfinals between the Dallas Stars and the Vancouver Canucks. Great game until they dropped the coverage during a 3rd OT timeout.Quote:
Originally Posted by JSH
Which only happened for certain people that had a specific cable provider because it was a mistake by the cable company, not Versus.Quote:
Originally Posted by pits4me
Nice try blowing it out of proportion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimispeed
I just looked at the Versus offerings on my channel guide. There is something called Racer TV that features motorcycle racing. There is another show called the Motorsports Hour that features "car crashes and other extreme motorsports action." There's a bicycle race on Saturday afternoon. There's a couple of shows that appear to deal with extreme fighting (or whatever you call it) and several bull riding shows. And I see that Hooter's Pro Cup is on at 4PM on Monday. But the overwhelming majority of shows listed from today through Sunday afternoon are hunting or fishing based programs.
I used to enjoy hunting and shooting quite a bit. When I watched OLN, I'd catch The World of Beretta. I bet Benelli's On Assignment and Winchester Legends are good shows, for those who enjoy hunting and shooting. Dangerous Game (the best hunt I was ever on involved a pack of wild boars and me with a .45 Magnum crawling on my stomach) and Monster Bulls sound good too. But these shows probably don't attract the typical racing demographic.
Maybe the IRL can gain sponsorships with Winchester, Remington, Beretta/Benelli, Cabela's and other sponsors that actually do seem to be big supporters of OLN/Versus programming. But I think that anyone who expects Versus to transform itself into "The IRL Channel" (or even a motorsports channel) in the next six months is likely due for a shock next season. The IRL is going to get more airtime on a channel that is available to fewer people than ABC/ESPN. How that plays out with sponsor exposure values and Nielsens is anybody's guess. But it goes without saying that sponsors will adjust their budgets (up or down) based on ROI, not fan emotions.
Since several here have claimed that the NHL/Versus deal is a sign of what (potential) success looks like, I am posting this to show that the NHL may see it one way and the players another. IMS/IRL may see the Versus deal one way. The teams and drivers may see it another way.
From Robin Miller:
Given the current state of things, I understand that it's not possible to just snap ones fingers and produce a better deal out of thin air. But part of the longer term risk has been illustrated by Miller in this snippet:Quote:
The National Hockey League, always a tough sell on television, opted to leave ESPN for Versus in 2005 because it felt abandoned just like IndyCar. Its feelings were soothed by the reported $70 million it was paid.
A few days ago, NHL Player's Association executive director Paul Kelly complained about Versus to The Sporting News, stating: "The players want the greatest exposure possible, particularly in the United States. We've got a majority of our guys living and playing in the U.S. and they are not satisfied with the nature of coverage at the national level in the U.S. While we would love Versus to rise up and become what ESPN is in terms of programming in homes, hotels and sports bars, the reality is they're not there."
Quote:
And several IRL owners voiced their understandable concerns about trying to sell a $3-6 million sponsorship package on a network primarily known for ultimate fighting that used to be the Outdoor Network.
Still, if it's not working, IndyCar can't afford to hang with Versus too long and TGeorge will simply get in line like everyone else on four wheels except NASCAR and buy time on network television.
I can't see the IRL ever having to pay for airtime, or any teams having to deal with sponsorship problems (any more than they already do that is).
The 500 has been and most likely always will be the reason the IRL has success in both of those departments. The 500 will still be on ABC, and ABC is still paying the IRL, and the sponors that are attracted to the IRL because of Indy will still be attracted to the IRL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Helix-
If all of that were true then why are they going to Versus in the first place???
Gary
In the words of the girl from My Name Is Earl (no pun intended), "Oh snaaap!"Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
If you'd told me 15 years ago that just having a bump day at Indy (where there's an actual bump or two) would be considered a big deal, I'd have said you were crazy. If you'd told me that the Nielsen ratings for Indy would be lower than those for the Coca Cola 600, and also dwarfed by the Daytona 500 roughly 2:1, I'd have said, "Ah man, get outta here!"
Isn't it amusing that Sanguin and -Helix- probably have more in common than either would realize or admit, eh? :D
But that sort of thing happens all the time on the networks. Iirc, we missed the start of a race on ABC *this* year.Quote:
Originally Posted by pits4me
The best *quality* coverage has been from SPEED.
The most viewers is on the networks.
It is impossible to get ideal coverage right now.
So, hopefully the quality of the coverage and support shows will be like SPEED.
Also, sponsors know that not all viewers are equal. Half the viewers won't mean half the value.
Important to this deal - this reality - is consumer access and the potential for growth. All stakeholders must be enthusiastic in this partnership. Then they will all maximize their benefit.
Robin Miller's NHL comments bring to mind that the NHL is now our partner in this. Indy Car fans and NHL fans have a common interest in having their local cable companies carrying Versus.
I'm not complaining about Versus because I get the channel with my DIRECTV, the same people who don't get the NFL channel complain (so I get the NFL ticket) and can watch every game not just four) But the reality is today Indycar racing is a niche sport and is not mainstream like NASCAR. Believe it or not promoters, drivers, good leadership and a sound business plan is what got NASCAR from TNN and tape delayed races ion Wide World of SPorts(ABC) to multi-million dollar tv contracts, naming rights and sponsors. Give Versus a chance! Because what was the alternative!
Link to Robin Miller's view posted on SpeedTV
http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...-question//P1/
thats one thing i will never do read what robin miller writes,everytime i listen or read what he says, i want to punch him :)
better off getting news from other sites,
I agree, but Robin seems to get a lot of respect by writers on this forum so I thought I would let everyone see his words.Quote:
Originally Posted by The IRL fan
sometimes i read his comments, and robin is like anti indycar,,Quote:
Originally Posted by dataman1
miller is just the type of guy, you agree with him, like many fans here,
or you dont like him,, i do agree with miller on somethings,
miller is just a love/hate kind of guy
Maybe the fact that Versus is NOT a built-up channel will be an advantage - more time to show MORE of IRL and other non-NASCAR series (like Hooters Pro Cup which we've watched on that network). We have Versus with DirecTV and have watched the channel a few times in the past. SPEED channel was little "road less traveled" in the past and now it's huge - perhaps Versus will be a HUGE opportunity for IRL/fans the way SPEED was for NASCAR?
*crossing fingers* :D
Uhm... for more money and better coverage?Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Would you prefer less money and horrible coverage?
And people think Tony does a bad job running this sport. :p
So what does your lack of outlook 15 years ago have to do with the topic at hand again?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Helix-
Better coverage? Or hope for better coverage? No one knows yet if any of the promised additional air time will come to fruition.
With 20 million fewer homes, the appeal to sponsors is already been questioned by some of the team principles. And while the 500 is the draw to the sponsors, it is not the ONLY thing that they look to. The fact that there are 20 million fewer possible viewers is going to give some of them pause, when deciding to pull the pin or not.
As one of those 20 million homes, I am really disappointed by the decision. I sure as hell am not going to run out and replace my cable TV which works rain or shine with the satellite setup like my father and nephew have that can't be seen in a downpour. And I am not holding my breath that Time Warner is going to bring that channel back in their lineup.
Gary
Well I actually get Versus and watch it quite frequently. I've seen what they've done with their NHL coverage and know that they're capable of great coverage. So no, it's not "hope". I actually know what I'm talking about. They've already promised us a 3 hour minimum timeslot for races and without having to worry about having to rush to the start of a tape delayed softball game it already sounds pretty good and will probably be even better. Also, no NASCABs constantly being shoved down our throats.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
When you already get 0.3's on ESPN, what's the difference? Atleast the ICS will have room to stretch it's legs on Versus where it actually has a chance to grow instead of being pushed down below poker replays and hot dog eating contests.Quote:
With 20 million fewer homes, the appeal to sponsors is already been questioned by some of the team principles. And while the 500 is the draw to the sponsors, it is not the ONLY thing that they look to. The fact that there are 20 million fewer possible viewers is going to give some of them pause, when deciding to pull the pin or not.
More airtime = sponsors getting more exposure for their money. Some sponsors probably see Versus as a GOOD thing, believe it or not.
Ratings, especially non-Indy ratings, don't play that important of a role in sponsor decisions. Ratings are a sham to begin with (and sponsors know this) but that's a whole different topic. It isn't as simple as "oh less people = less money". It's a bit more complex than that. They're going to take in Versus' potential and the different kinds of audiences that are tuning in into account as well. When you already have a small hardcore fanbase that is pretty loyal to the sponsors that work with the series, a slightly smaller hardcore fanbase is not going to make that much of a difference. They're still getting about the same bang for their buck, and because Indy is still on ABC, the ratings that the sponsors are REALLY interested in shouldn't suffer at all.
Well I'm sorry for your situation. (Though it sounds like it's a personal choice to not be able to view the races to me) But thankfully networks have the ability to grow to more households. I bet at one point you didn't get ESPN either.Quote:
As one of those 20 million homes, I am really disappointed by the decision. I sure as hell am not going to run out and replace my cable TV which works rain or shine with the satellite setup like my father and nephew have that can't be seen in a downpour. And I am not holding my breath that Time Warner is going to bring that channel back in their lineup.
Gary
I would recommend bugging the hell out of your cable provider and getting others to do the same. It's up to us the fans to see Versus reach more households. Though I already get it, so I'm pretty happy.
It's difficult for me to understand (and bigtime TV people must be able to explain it) why Time Warner in Cincinnati doesn't have Versus and Time Warner in other locations does. One would think the a cable provider's deal with a network would be the WHOLE network and the WHOLE cable provider system. I suppose it's how they strike a bargain as to how much someone pays someone, but it's still confusing.
Comcast recently took the TV Guide channel off its basic program in Indianapolis. No notice, no nothing. Just "Channel Not Available" comes up when you hit the numbers. It appears to me that you sign up with any of these providers that they can be very arbitrary about what they give to you for how much money when.
Not only because of versus or Indycar, but I've thought for quite awhile that it's time for me to check out different deals and see if I can do better. When I got around to doing that with my cell phone and home phone and redoing the deals, it saved me $700 a year.
Take 15 years and figure it out for yourself. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by -Helix-
Originally Posted by -Helix- http://www.motorsportforum.com/forum...s/viewpost.gif
I can't see the IRL ever having to pay for airtime, or any teams having to deal with sponsorship problems (any more than they already do that is).
Some may. No one is suggesting that ALL sponsors will see Versus as a bad deal. Some may be perfectly fine with it, depending on what their expectations are. But sponsor exposure value is calculated based on On-screen time + mentions x non-discounted commercial ad cost. The ad rates on Versus are not as great as those on ABC, or likely even ESPN. So it would take a greater amount of time x in focus views + mentions on Versus for a sponsor to get the same level of sponsor exposure value as they'd have gotten on ABC/ESPN.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Helix-
Indy, being the biggest race and ratings bucket is the biggest slice of the pie - that is accurate. But to say that sponsors don't consider the ratings of non-Indy ratings to be that important is completely inaccurate. Commercial networks make the bulk of their money selling ad time. ABC/ESPN had trouble selling non-discounted ad time on the non-Indy races. Why? I would say because the ratings and viewership figures were relatively low... but I'm not stating that as a fact. Probably a good guess though. Low ratings generally mean less ad revenue. Less ad revenue means that your product won't be valued as highly as a program with higher ratings and better ad revenue.Quote:
Ratings, especially non-Indy ratings, don't play that important of a role in sponsor decisions. Ratings are a sham to begin with (and sponsors know this) but that's a whole different topic.
And it's not that "ratings are a sham"... and no, sponsors don't know this. The Nielsen measurement system is like any other measurement system based on random sampling. Various groups and sponsors (not just related to racing or sports) have voiced concerns that Nielsen Media is missing a necessary component of measurement system analysis: that the system be not just random, but also representative of the population universe being measured.
Certainly the Nielsen system is not perfect. But it's typically those fans of lower rated shows that complain that the system is a "sham or "bogus" or "not fair." But only if there was proof of bias in the system could people show that Nielsen systematically undercounts those who watch certain programs. The main issue I've heard that subscribers have with Nielsen is its lack of accurate representation to the population, which hampers them in doing deep demographic studies.
It's not that much more complex. Ratings and viewership are used to set ad rates. Ad rates, being a component, drive sponsor exposure values. Sponsors (arms length companies) primarily use historical sponsor exposure values to determine future sponsorship levels or limits.Quote:
It isn't as simple as "oh less people = less money". It's a bit more complex than that.
Excluding B2B arrangements, that's how the three divisions of my former company determined sponsorship limits, that's how my current company sets its F1 budget and that's how every participating company at the sponsorship conference in Charlotte several years ago determined what level of sponsorship cost would still provide an acceptable ROI.
In your opinion.Quote:
They're going to take in Versus' potential and the different kinds of audiences that are tuning in into account as well. When you already have a small hardcore fanbase that is pretty loyal to the sponsors that work with the series, a slightly smaller hardcore fanbase is not going to make that much of a difference.
It's interesting that you already know this when meetings just began yesterday to determine what Versus means for teams, the series and sponsors. Charlie Morgan admits that he's still not sure how many IRL fans are even reached by Versus. Instead of trying to spin this, why not just admit (like the rest of us... and the IRL/IMS) that these are still open questions at this point?Quote:
They're still getting about the same bang for their buck, and because Indy is still on ABC, the ratings that the sponsors are REALLY interested in shouldn't suffer at all.
The IRL and its teams may find a way to make this work for sponsors and fans. But despite the spin going on here, that question has yet to be answered.
Now you see why so many people are going satellite and cable is dropping so fast. Going with a national satellite provider (DirecTV is the best IMO - more sports packages/options) ensures that you will get these channels and that they won't just drop off like they do with a local provider. Watch for big deals on FREE installation, FREE receivers and sometimes FREE upgrade to HD which in my experience has made a HUGE difference in our race-watching experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by indycool
You list some of the pros that satellite offers, but there are cons. The main one that prevents me from going to the dish is that if you live in an area that has a lot of thunder storms, you will have to put up with a lot of service interuptions. Our friends that have dish satellites have told us that when it storms, they lose their signals.Quote:
Originally Posted by carracing
I live in SE Michigan. Summer contains frequent severe thunderstorms and winter has frequent severe snowstorms.Quote:
Originally Posted by DBell
My DirecTV signal drops out for about an average of 10 minutes per year - due to satellite reception. :p
Power related drop outs due to the wildly inadequate electrical infrastructure in this country are a completely different issue. :vader:
LIke JSH, I too live in a rural area (central Indiana) where electricity is lost far more often than the digital signal from a dish. No cable offered. I have had C/Ku-band for nearly 15 years. Added the DISH Network around 5 years ago. Yes, I loose signal during heavy thunderstorms for maybe 3 minutes but likely would loose electrical first. Once the power goes doesn't matter where the signal is coming from. You're not going to see it unless you invest in a generator.
FYI, Versus is not in my package with either the big dish or Dish Network. Guess I'll watch from a bar.
I had Dish for six months. It was horrible. Signal always dropping, pixillated screens constantly, more picture related service calls, than I could count, and the infamous, you realy need to take down those two trees.. Hmmmm, a two hundred year oak tree in my yard I WON'T take down, and a HUGE Maple tree on city property I CAN'T, or your POS satellite dish? I put up wiht comcast until Verizon finally gets the FIOS in our neighborhood.
My biggest problem with this deal. No matter how popular ICS gets over the next decade at least 13 of 22 (The historic max) races have to be on a rather obscure cable channel. No matter how positive you spin it, its not the greatest deal ever. Maybe the greatest deal available.
The worst case scenario is we get 18 cars driving around empty tracks in front a group of about 300,000 die hards, which is pretty much what the league was until this year
Like Pook or Craig or Gentilozzi or KK or GF?
We really don't know the details of this deal. We know it's a 10-year deal. We don't know "out" or "in" clauses in it that may or may not exist based on ratings or reach. Do I think the deal will be the same "split" in Year #10 as it is in Year #1? We hafta wait 10 years to find out, but NO.
Good point, but I think the signals/technology/equipment have really come around in the last few years. I live in the middle of nowhere in the California desert - we get sand storms and major winds about half the year. We had one storm that knocked out reception, but it was back on in about 15 minutes. The new HD dish that they have is even better - tons of summer t-storms this year and ZERO signal loss. We had Dish Network a few years back and it was awful - lots of dropped signals - I felt like I was playing telephone with paper cups & string. lol Not sure if DirecTV is just "that much better" or if it's just the evolution of the technology. I would NEVER go back to cable. My mom lives 20 miles away and her cable is out all the time. The worst part? She has cable TV, Internet and VoIP phone, so when it goes - it ALL goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by DBell
I have DirecTV and the only time that it has gone out for me is when I should be in the basement, not watching TV.
Agree; I also have DirecTv & if the sat goes out, I need to be listening to the weather radio, not watching a race.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
LPGA??? Again???? Maybe there is a silver lining in the Versus TV deal. At least we won't have to watch golf as the race starts.
Gary
THREE-way playoff......sheesh.
agreed gary, i can't fathom how there's viewership over 100,000 for a women's golf event. Do people really watch that? And VS can be channel 200 for all I care, as long as they don't bump the start of the races.
Same here - im not sure if we can get Versus in OzQuote:
Originally Posted by inimitablestoo
We might be up s- creek with not much of a paddle If they dont offload it to another station
I read earlier that ESPN would carry the international feeds of the races, but that might only apply to the 5 they have purchased.