Media/TV/Internet in sportscar racing

[MaskedRacer]

Can talk about media for any series of course but I want to focus on IMSA. They of anybody need a online subscription service you can pay for. My dream is it can provide:

1. Live and archived coverage of every session including practice sessions

2. Option to turn on and off commentary

3. Live timing and scoring that is concurrent to point of the race that you are at even when you are watching the race on delay or replay.

4. Same thing for the cars/dots following on the track

5. The same full race in car cameras you see as on the IMSA.com tv page but archived as well.

6. A real kicker that would be neat if it can be pulled off is a channel that focuses on just the GT races on the track.

I think IMSA worrying about if they are FS1 or FS2 is pointless now. Yes they should try to get on the FOX network as much as possible but beyond that. Focus on the paid online subscription service and MARKETING MARKETING MARKETING. IMSA cars are a natural fit for the Fast and Furious movies and maybe even a TV cop show. I mean you can base an episode of Law and Order or something like that based on a con man who used the money to fund a race team like Scott Tucker. But while filming that episode you can show off the cool race cars and drivers that IMSA has to offer.

[Maelochs]

There have been enough shady individuals in sports car to have a season-long weekly series---drug dealers and smugglers and swindlers, people robbing churches and bars and commandeering Indian tribes .... Only problem is it will make everyone think sports car racing is a den of thieves.

As for Pay-per-view ....

Based on what FIA-WEC has insulted us all with .... it would need all the things you mentioned plus Radio Le Mans coverage (even if they call it "IMSA radio") as an option for every session .. and NO COMMERCIALS EVER.

And NEVER any Fox Sports intro music.

And it would need to be a rock-steady reliable stream, every time, all the time.

As a start, they could just tie T&S to the YouTube stream just to prove they can conquer the technical obstacles there.

[MaskedRacer]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

There have been enough shady individuals in sports car to have a season-long weekly series---drug dealers and smugglers and swindlers, people robbing churches and bars and commandeering Indian tribes .... Only problem is it will make everyone think sports car racing is a den of thieves.

As for Pay-per-view ....

Based on what FIA-WEC has insulted us all with .... it would need all the things you mentioned plus Radio Le Mans coverage (even if they call it "IMSA radio") as an option for every session .. and NO COMMERCIALS EVER.

And NEVER any Fox Sports intro music.

And it would need to be a rock-steady reliable stream, every time, all the time.

As a start, they could just tie T&S to the YouTube stream just to prove they can conquer the technical obstacles there.

Good points. I think one episode featuring a race car crook would be good enough by the way.

Also I am certain that the concept of a subscription service for IMSA would include IMSA radio commentary. I think the option to turn them off and hear just the engines through a race or session is cool for when we get to that point we want to watch a replay for the 3rd time or something like that. We love Hindy and Shaw of course! The idea of that comes from seeing some of the free practice sessions for the Blancpain GT races on youtube. They are free of commentary and that was pretty neat. Although I also love John Watson.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by MaskedRacer

I think the option to turn them off and hear just the engines through a race or session is cool for when we get to that point we want to watch a replay for the 3rd time or something like that.

I agree with that.

[billy bleach]

Great programme on BBC 2 about Chris Hoy at Lemans. Bloke to take up a career in diplomacy! What an angry team!!!

[Akrapovic]

I can't speak for domestic American viewing, because I've never watched it. But for international viewers, IMSA is basically perfect with the streaming.

IMSA Radio (otherwise known as Radio Le Mans) has a stream which is easy to find, works on every device I've tried, is high quality and reliable, and has the perfect set of commentators. However, commentator tastes change depending on where you are in the world. I personally cannot stand the American style commentators who prefer a heart warming story about how someones dog once was friends with a cat and died 17 years ago to the day, and that's why it's a meaningful victory. I'd rather have Hindy and Goodwin arguing about something incredibly geeky whilst Martin Haven has a rant about something. It's just personal tastes, but if a series doens't have RLM commentary, it gets harder to watch IMO.

This actually becoming the norm now days, and it's fantastic. ELMS, N24, SuperGT, IMSA, Spa 24 have all taken the route of making their series easier to watch, and providing RLM commentators for it. It really opens doors to new series when you hear familiar, trustworthy voices out the speakers.

It seems that IMSA needs to work on the domestic viewing package. International, I wouldn't change a thing personally.

[MagVanisher]

Speaking of commentary, I wonder if there's an option of choosing either English (mostly Radio Le Mans) or foreign should the race is held countries like Germany, France, Japan, etc.?

I've watched the recent Super GT race in Buriram and I noticed that I'm hearing some Japanese commentary, specifically the pit garage report.

Now if Youtube can have that option, it'll accommodate foreign-language and English commentary at the same time without changing the video feed. Not just in motorsports, but for traditional sports and e-sports.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I can't speak for domestic American viewing, because I've never watched it. But for international viewers, IMSA is basically perfect with the streaming.


It seems that IMSA needs to work on the domestic viewing package. International, I wouldn't change a thing personally.

I think you are correct on this. I think it is great that IMSA has top-notch international coverage, but what about the home product? Their target audience (for sponsorship $) is in North America, but they make it an awful hard sell for companies when we can't see the races with ease. Perhaps companies prefer to hear a race will be on cable though instead of being streamed live?

I don't know what it costs to produce a 10, 12 or 24 hour race, but the costs have to be pretty significant. So does the series simply want to cover production costs and get a tv deal, or do they want to try and make some money off the coverage?

edit: I guess a better way to state my question is, what is the point of a tv product? To let the fans seek it out who want to watch? Or to introduce the product to new fans? IMSA always thinks new fans are watching and puts all these segments about racing and tires and such into the broadcast as if new viewers are watching, but then puts the race on an obscure cable channel where only die hard fans will seek it out.

[TzeiTzei]

Originally Posted by joeb

Perhaps companies prefer to hear a race will be on cable though instead of being streamed live?

I think you're on to something here. To some people streaming might sound like "oh, you're product is so bad no broadcaster wants it".

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by joeb

edit: I guess a better way to state my question is, what is the point of a tv product? To let the fans seek it out who want to watch? Or to introduce the product to new fans? IMSA always thinks new fans are watching and puts all these segments about racing and tires and such into the broadcast as if new viewers are watching, but then puts the race on an obscure cable channel where only die hard fans will seek it out.

The constant "features" about the race are one of the things I cannot stand about American broadcasting. You're continually bombarded with features about the race you're trying to watch. In reality, it's an advertisement. Continental pay for an advert to be mid broadcast, and they disguise it as a "feature" where they talk about how amazing the tyres are. Then you cut back to the race and the lead has changed and they don't really care.

With TV, the race is simply a vessel to provide advertising space. With streaming, the race is the main feature, and takes priority.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

With TV, the race is simply a vessel to provide advertising space. With streaming, the race is the main feature, and takes priority.

That is an excellent point. But how do you grow the viewership if you only have a stream? I would love a streaming option, but I feel like you grow you need to get in front of new audiences. That is what a tv deal can bring you.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by joeb

That is an excellent point. But how do you grow the viewership if you only have a stream? I would love a streaming option, but I feel like you grow you need to get in front of new audiences. That is what a tv deal can bring you.

Good question and I don't really have an answer. Promoted streams? I know when I start YouTube on my Xbox, and there's a SpaceX or ELMS stream starting in a couple of hours, it's literally the first video I select. It obviously knows I like this stuff so moves it to the front. I imagine paid/promoted content is a thing on YouTube. So do you pay YouTube to promote your live event?

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

With TV, the race is simply a vessel to provide advertising space. With streaming, the race is the main feature, and takes priority.

That is the problem, if the race is the only object, who's paying for it? Obviously there isn't enough interest or money in it to even buy tv time as the ALMS was so where is the money coming from without paid features? Even streaming costs buckets of cash and it seems like IMSA has teaspoons of cash to use.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

That is the problem, if the race is the only object, who's paying for it? Obviously there isn't enough interest or money in it to even buy tv time as the ALMS was so where is the money coming from without paid features? Even streaming costs buckets of cash and it seems like IMSA has teaspoons of cash to use.

What you say makes sense. But IMSA is already streaming to everywhere except the US, and is paying RLM for their services. So that expense is already there. There's no reason why it can't be on TV and streaming unless you've allowed the TV company to say no to that. This seems like a problem IMSA has created.

[CyberMotor]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

That is the problem, if the race is the only object, who's paying for it? Obviously there isn't enough interest or money in it to even buy tv time as the ALMS was so where is the money coming from without paid features? Even streaming costs buckets of cash and it seems like IMSA has teaspoons of cash to use.

What's the cost to stream as compared to the cost of live TV?

Also, sponsors have their names all over the cars, along the track, in view of the onboard cameras, etc. so there is already a lot of built-in exposure for sponsors. I think streaming is more cost-effective, a better medium and a better package. How many views of a sponsors name do you get on a 12-hour stream as compared to a two-hour highlight?

[seanyb505]

How about turn the online streaming into a pyramid scheme? Your fans will sell the series and subscriptions for you. That way no one has to worry about the casual fan getting hooked because they casually happened to surf past fs2 in between bowling semi quarter finals practice.

Intentionality of users searching for somewhere to pay would shoot through the roof. I'd be genuinely curious how many people upgraded cable tiers so they would have access to North American sports car and endurance racing.

[Ephaeton]

Originally Posted by MaskedRacer

Can talk about media for any series of course but I want to focus on IMSA.

FYI, I am working on #3, for IMSA (and IMSA series), ELMS & WEC currently.

[Akrapovic]

Seems like a very complex and regulated situation in the States, like you say. I honestly don't know enough to comment on how to have that changed. Its a shame the American domestic coverage can't get the quality that we get in Europe. Sports car racing in general is in a very good place streaming wise over here. The one major exception is PWC.

[joeb]

I just have to say reading this thread is refreshing. There has been polite and thoughtful discussion of issues, with no negativity and name calling. Keep it up!

[fieldodreams79]

I've asked elsewhere here and I don't think there's been an answer but how many more years is the FOX contract?

I'll second the others desires to have a full fledged stream / online "database" where all info is contained and that having a dedicated site / stream leads to covering the event rather than hawking whatever FOX marketing team thinks the target audience is through infomericals and their "flashy" coverage.

FOXgo is available for everyone I believe so not having FS2 shouldn't be the reason to hate FOX. Their coverage does just fine making them look ridiculous...

I don't like to pay for much more than I already do. Yes, I get it, it would be "just 20 dollars" or whatever, but that phrase gets thrown out there 9x a week. Until everything is as reliable and as consistent as the old cable box, I'm sticking with that and free streams.

Originally Posted by joeb

I just have to say reading this thread is refreshing. There has been polite and thoughtful discussion of issues, with no negativity and name calling. Keep it up!

Shut up. This could be a jinx...

[Akrapovic]

Does Streaming in America *require* a TV broadcaster to do it? does the race absolutely have to be on Fox Sports as well? Why can't IMSA just stream their own website. Or YouTube and embed the video.

Everyone now has computers or even Smart TVs. It makes it easier to watch. Why not drop TV completely?

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Everyone now has computers or even Smart TVs. It makes it easier to watch. Why not drop TV completely?

Because the race is broadcast not for the fans but for the sponsors. Sponsors want to be on TV, where they think they get more eyeballs ... and possibly, fresh eyeballs.

With TV, they can advertise the race. if the race is broadcast online online, how can they get word to new viewers? Apparently they don't want to advertise non-TV sources on TV ... or only if there is a TV-based option

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Because the race is broadcast not for the fans but for the sponsors. Sponsors want to be on TV, where they think they get more eyeballs ... and possibly, fresh eyeballs.

With TV, they can advertise the race. if the race is broadcast online online, how can they get word to new viewers? Apparently they don't want to advertise non-TV sources on TV ... or only if there is a TV-based option

That's all fine and makes sense, but does this problem exist in the US and no where else? As discussed, there are ways of reaching new audiences online very easily, especially using YouTube.

This seems like a problem that is isolated to the United States and created by the TV companies.

[fieldodreams79]

Maybe not "TV companies", but more of media groups that hold multi facets of telecommunication and drive everything through the cheapest medium. Much like other large corporations and industries, they are very slow to change, especially if it impacts the CEO's salary and dividends.

[Maelochs]

I'd say the real "driving force" (which in this case is a retarding force) are the advertisers ... who probably notice that people demand no or fewer ads in their online streams (they are already paying for them) and that online ads seem not to be as effective as TV ads.

Advertisers still see broadcast TV as the Mecca of advertising outreach, followed by cable TV, going down the tiers (which is why FS1 is so coveted compared to FS2---sponsors will pay more for the Chance to be in front of more eyeballs.)

Advertisers depend on repetition, too .... but web-watchers seem to really dislike streams with a lot of commercials. Also, people can fast-forward through commercials on a recorded stream, which makes YouTube commercials pretty much worthless.

We as fans look at the race broadcast from a fan's point of view. For the series it is a revenue center (a view which killed ALMS, IMO) to be sold in small chunks for large dollars. That's why Fox doesn't care that it makes races almost unwatchable with its frequent breaks ... it is making money with each ad, and if people cannot follow the race, who cares? Fox got the money for the subscription, and got money for the advertisement.

Advertisers count on the TV format for new viewers because they can sample the entire TV population ... anyone using any kind of TV-Guide function can see any program. Nobody is going to randomly scroll through three hundred thousand YouTube channels and think "Hey, some racing thing I have never heard of! Yahoo!" but (at least in the thinking of TV folks) a person might be scrolling through the much more limited channel list provided by cable and broadcast TV and see some racing series ....