http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvgMIerTXl4Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Printable View
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvgMIerTXl4Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
seriosly Gary?
nothing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
sounds like a three day attendance discussion to me....not sure we should go there......might teak a downtowndeco nerve
Can't watch Youtube here at work. Wanna give me a run down?Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
work is overrated
tell me you dont wear a tie and wake up everyday to an alarmclock
I don't wear a tie, but I do wake up to an alarmclock. :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
Between the Versus deal and the Spike deal? Nope, I seriously see nothing at all similar between them other than the CURRENT ratings. I truly mean that. The content is VASTLY different. The channel commitment is VASTLY different. The channel promotion is VASTLY different. The potential is VASTLY different. The Spike deal never had a glimmer of hope from day one. The Versus one has that glimmer.
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
Who cares if he get's his panties in a bunch. I sure as hell don't. No, really, I am curious about this. I do wonder what the measure is, for the advertisers. I would think that they WOULD factor in the length of the show as well, simply because it gives them the opportunity to get their message out more often. But if the eyeballs are them same does it matter to them? Is one message to 100 sets of eyeballs the same as two messages to 50 eyeballs. Or to put it another way, is one messge to 100 eyeballs the same as two messages to 100 eyeballs? I doubt that either of those "formulas" is right, but I don't know WHAT formula they would use. Hence my question.
But my point is that I think the length of the show is a factor, therefore the .15 for this year is probably not as bad as it looks. It's bad, I agree. I am just trying to figure out HOW BAD in the eyes of the folks footing the bill.
Gary
ChampCar during the low years:
90M in Team Budgets
25M in JJ Sponsor Value
IndyCar 2009
145M in Team Budgets
125M in JJ Sponsor Value.
Neither is a real healthy situation but they are not really comparable.
Now these are my best guess gross approximations I don't want to micro-argue every point but after the 2009 Indy 500 the Sponsor Value for IndyCar will be several times higher than any year of ChampCar.
Now back to the regularly scheduled argument..
Here's to first safe, second good race, and third, let's close the gap on the TV on the Concord 600....
Cya @ Texas!!
Go Horns CWS.....
rh
Ok Hoop I need some explaination, I'm too slow. Is the Team Budget what they spend? And is JJ Sponsor Value what a Sponsor can expect in return? Or am I way off base?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
total budget for the entire grid is 145mil..... Joyce julius (which does factor length of broadcast and amount of mentions and screen time etc as well as attendance)....will result in 125mil total sponsor value...
Hoop?...are those 2008 figures and not 2009?... or were those 2009 projections?
*editors note:... not 100% sure if JJ #'s factor in attendance....
Yes, Team Budgets, are my approximation of Team budgets, - direct compensation such as prize money.
I deliberately low balled the JJ value for INDYCAR, they may hit 125 at INDY alone.
Joyce Julius and Associates prepares a "Sponsors Report" that has two components.
The Time a Sponsors name or logo appears on TV times the Ad Rate for the event.
"As one of the most watched sporting events, the race has a high advertising rate, said Eric Wright, vice president of research and development at the sponsorship research firm Joyce Julius & Associates in Ann Arbor, Mich.It doesn't take a winning driver to have the most sponsors. It does, however, take skill and charisma, looks and potential, Angstadt said.
Which brings us back to Patrick and our rankings of who will be the most valuable drivers in Sunday's Indianapolis 500.
Last year, Patrick placed 22nd at the Speedway, but she still pulled in about $15 million for her personal and team sponsors, according to Joyce Julius.
The logos for her team and personal sponsors, including Motorola, GoDaddy.com and AirTran, spent so much time on TV that they rivaled that of Target, sponsor of winner Scott Dixon's team, Target Chip Ganassi Racing. Target was on TV for 14 minutes; sponsors associated with Patrick and her team, Andretti Green Racing, were on for about 38 minutes.
This year, Patrick is in much the same position, if not a better one. Not only does she still count GoDaddy.com and Motorola among her sponsors, but she's also picked up Boost Mobile.
Primary sponsorships in the IndyCar Series range from $2.5 million to $7 million, though few companies ever cite exact investment amounts."
rh
The
Ken AKA SFF, it is the time prominently displayed, visible etc * ad rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
This is really what caused the end of CART, not some sellout by evil men.
When Target looked at the value numbers of one race, the Indy 500, equaling an entire season in CART the die was cast.
Now at the end of this year I would guess IRL is down from 08 but I wouldn't be surprised if they hit 180M.
So AD Rates and time sold is what really counts, not ratings. Of course ratings drive the former 2, but the worst case scenario for the IRL this year is 4-6 times better than Champcar's worst case.
I'm not saying it is all fine. or even sustainable, just a lot different.
Now this is about all I am going to say on this, back to racing.
rh
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
come on hoop.... ratings drive the cost of the ads...
how much is an advertiser going to pay for .15
Come on sf indy will be over a hundred ... U just love typin .15 lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
and it will be on ABC... which is a seperate deal...
and you like pretended you dont like participateing in these threads.... yet you do over and over on everyone of them...
back to your regularly scheduled racing
Everyone of them is a flat out lie goodbye**
The NHL bounced back on Versus, so will IndyCar.
Is it just me, or are there a greater variety of sponsors this year over last? If so that's impressive considering the cutbacks occurring elsewhere.
:)
now its just getting sillyQuote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
Best post of the thread!Quote:
Originally Posted by MDS
i like how you say that as if your own personal opinion is scientifically proven fact...Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
personally, I'm loving the Versus coverage and IndyCar is actually kinda fun again. Seems positive to me. Now they just need those new cars and some of the old great tracks.
are ratings important? yeah, i guess for TG and those who reap the benefits of good ratings.. but for me as a race fan? nope. couldn't care less actually. fans will start tuning into Versus eventually if the product is good
[quote="MDS"]It is worth pointing out that its the first meaningful bump day since the IRL was created.
QUOTE]
That is merely your opinioin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
So which part do you disagree with, that it was meaningful or that it was the first meaningful once since the split?
Gary
totally agree with you,Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
I would say that this year's bump day was the most entertaining one in many years, but I'm not sure how it got that way says much about the strength of the series one way or the other, it was more a matter of Sunday's track being faster than Saturday's. When the weekend started, there were 35 car and driver combinations trying for the 33 spots. It was fairly apparent that two of these, Stanton Barrett and Buddy Lazier, were going to have trouble making the field, and that there were three others, Ryan Hunter-Reay, Milka Duno, and Nelson Phillipe that were not very strong. So, Bruno Junqueria was added as a last minute entry. He didn't get out onto the track until Sunday morning, but was immediately quick enough in practice to show that he would almost certainly be able to bump someone out, which he did in one attempt. It was fairly apparent in Sunday morning's practice that the track was a couple of mph quicker than it had been on the previous day, and that was absolutely confirmed when Milka Duno went out and ran a 221.1 while essentially driving down the middle of the track. To me, that said that anyone who had less than a 221 was vulnerable, and if I were a team manager of a car who had qualified at less than that, I'd have gotten in line immediately and gone out and requalified, and then had the rest of the day to work on race setup.
There is always a certain amount of risk in requalifying, but if you're trying to avoid risk, you're in the wrong sport.
I guess one could say both, the first since the IRL was formed was the main ghist.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Whether it means anything is strictly in eyes of the beholder.
Let me jump in late.
First off, the TV coverage is good but the ratings suck. (ABC/ESPN actually do suck still, but VS is the majority of the coverage, hence the good rating) Fact of life, you cant heal 13 years of confusion, disinterest and mismanagement in 3 months. It wont and cant happen. This is going to be a long hard slog to maybe get back to half what NASCAR is. Better get used to that reality.
Secondly, while it was great we had a bumping process, when 45 cars are going for 33 spots, THEN WE HAVE BUMP DAY in spades. What we had this year was interesting, only because for all the years we had two series, there was no bumping. When Roger Penske's team misses Indy, THAT's Drama. Whether Stanton Barrett makes or doesn't make the field isn't drama.
3rd, while I am optimistic Barnhart knows what he is doing on running the actual on track product, and I have been impressed by the professionalism on that side of things, I still worry that the marketing and management of the series as a whole is still chasing around trying to find a strategy and focus.
The TV product looks and sounds good and VS has to be given credit for putting the effort in. The results are going to have to wait until either people start cluing into this product or start getting VS. But I still don't know if Tony George has learned a damned thing from the last 14 years. I just don't think he has a vision that makes any sense and he cannot articulate it. He never built the Speedway, he is a caretaker of it, and while he has done some good things for it in allowing in NASCAR, F1 and MotoGP, he never got the IRL to any sort of level that made you think he really understands how to market the product. In short, I would really like him to focus on his track, and leave the IRL to others. Be a silent partner and let the series go and evolve.
He made a mistake in 93, and he has corrected part of his folly by at least admitting he needed the other side and putting the egg back together again, but there is 13 years of lost opportunities, lost fan base and lost attention from the media. We wont get that back in 3 months and we may not get it back in 10 years. If someone can find a way to energize the public marketing wise, the product is almost back to where it was in the early 90's. When the economy improves, I think we will see 26 car fields on a regular basis, maybe more. The depth of field is coming back and we just need a bit more variety in setups and car design to help add some spice from that angle.
OW racing was on life support, but I think it is out of the ICU. The situation is no longer critical. I would say the patient is now in Serious condition. That is to be expected with the turmoil and pain of the last decade and a half. Give it time boys...give it time...
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Helix-
Overnights are out.....
Wanna take a stab at where they rank before I post it?
Whatever they are, must be a "Smack" in the face ;n)
rh
are you suggesting there notQuote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken
Jeeze Ken, why so freakin' confrontational? Hoop didn't say a thing to that effect.
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Multi forum culture going Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken
Huh? Ya' lost me on that one bud.
Gary
Sent you a pm Gary. That should clear it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
These numbers are interesting. What seems to be missing is an analysis of the JJ number for the IRL or I500 separately. Using your numbers then it would be something like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
Champ Car
90M in Team Budgets
25M in JJ Sponsor Value
IndyCar 2009
145M in Team Budgets
100M in JJ Sponsor Value I500
25M in JJ sponosr value rest of the IRL
I dont wish to a big argument about the unification again, but I'm at a loss at how the IRL is considered in a better financial position then Champ Car ever was. If the story from today shows anything, it is that simply rolling in profits of the I500 as if it was a direct part of the IRL is a mistake and the not the proper long term way to look at it.
unfortunately the ship has sailed on what would have been the only easy fix to balance these numbers in the black
Champ Car
90M in Team Budgets
25M in JJ Sponsor Value
100M JJ value for the I500
The notion that the IRL and the I500 were intrinsically linked precluded that possibility. Today, that idea seems in great question
No doubt, no 500 no IRL...Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWS77
In the late 90s the JJ's for CART were in the 200s the two series crossed around 2002. That's when Target saw the SV of the 500 was = to the CART season.
Without the 500 IRL = CCWS, a no go for sure.
rh