Ratings

Testure · 2 Jun 2004, 13:54 (Ref:991529)

Ratings for the 500 seem to be out. A story from the NY Times gives a 4.7. This is down from last year (which is bad), but better than the Coke 600 (which is good).

sgw2 · 2 Jun 2004, 19:49 (Ref:991914)

I know the rain delay hurt. But that is not good.

Yesh! OW is dying. OWRS is hopeless. IRL needs to change management, become bold and go after a broader market before the two series finish bleeding down the fan base.

I read that Long Beach had only 40-45K on race day (down from 70K last year, as some grandstands were missing this year and others smaler or half full), while Indy had open seats and only 10K on pole day. The fans are staying away in larger and larger numbers.

This is a case of OWRS/CART losing much faster than IRL is losing. But IRL is losing too. TV ratings will continue to shrink until the fan base expands again.

Get cracking guys!

Tim Northcutt · 2 Jun 2004, 20:57 (Ref:991972)

Quote:

Originally posted by sgw2
I know the rain delay hurt. But that is not good.

Yesh! OW is dying. OWRS is hopeless. IRL needs to change management, become bold and go after a broader market before the two series finish bleeding down the fan base.

I read that Long Beach had only 40-45K on race day (down from 70K last year, as some grandstands were missing this year and others smaler or half full), while Indy had open seats and only 10K on pole day. The fans are staying away in larger and larger numbers.

This is a case of OWRS/CART losing much faster than IRL is losing. But IRL is losing too. TV ratings will continue to shrink until the fan base expands again.

Get cracking guys!

Prior to the rain, I didn't recall seeing "open seats in the grandstands that I could see, sqw2....I sat in Turn 3....

People did leave after the 1st rainfall during the Race....

On another thread in this Forum, I addressed "Indy 500" attendance, and some facts people may not be aware of concerning "seating years ago" vs. seating now, and ticket avialability issues, etc....

But I can't remember which thread....

I'll find it and steer you to it....because what I stated in there (especially from the past) is true...and it certainly impacted seating and ticket availability....

Tim Northcutt · 2 Jun 2004, 21:00 (Ref:991973)

To sqw2:

It is posted on the "Indy500 Spoilers" thread....on Page 5...

as of this post I'm writing now, it is the last post on that thread....

GP Racer · 3 Jun 2004, 01:10 (Ref:992152)

I'm not sure how accurate the ratings for this years race can be. I mean it went over 8 hrs! You have to be a pretty hard-core fan, to stay with it for that long(I did!)It was the longest telivised live sports show in ABC history, and the network gets high marks in my book for sticking with it.

To do that, they must surely believe in this race, and have just resigned the series to a long term contract.

Excuse me for being optomistic...

sgw2 · 3 Jun 2004, 04:28 (Ref:992224)

Tim,

I watched on TV. Yeah, the seats were mostly filled up before the rain. I should have used the word smattering to qualify my statement. It was nearly full, but by no means a sellout - that is something new.

That said, I think IRL is far healtheir than OWRS, but not really healthy. The inability to find sponsors is telling. Getting TV numbers and month long interest is required. That means more than 26 cars have to be ready to run on pole day. It means 25-30 cars need to be runninng the serie sregularily.

What I meant to say, is lets not be compalcant with the notion that CCWS is dying therefore IRL can sit on their bums and reap the benefits. As we have seen there has been precious little gain from CCWS' losses. And they don't have much left to lose.

Were I running a business and my competitor collapsed, losing half his market, but my sales were flat, then I'd call it a crisis and demand a direction be taken to grow my company's sales and now.

The complaint I have is the lack luster IRL management, which seems incapable of explotation and growth. Of course this looks good compared to the amatuer hour over at OWRS and before it Pook and Heitzler at CART. But it is mediocre at best compared to NASCAR. And that is whom you have to measure against, beacuse that is who the sponsors measure against.

I guess my mind is in the same mode as Roger Penske. Status quo is not acceptable anymore for IRL. Growth and now before you lose the manufacturers and sponsors to NASCAR.

marcus · 3 Jun 2004, 06:42 (Ref:992274)

I never pay attention to Tv ratings.

they really dont mean anything because the entire country isnt included is it ?

I mean Ive never had anyone knock on my door and ask "what have you been watching ?"

so how do they get these ratings ?

Testure · 3 Jun 2004, 09:26 (Ref:992428)

Since it's not possible to monitor what every TV in the country is showing, ratings are produced using sampling and some simple statistics. It's a technique that's been around for a very long time now, so I don't think we can really argue that the numbers are wrong. Sorry

Testure · 3 Jun 2004, 09:28 (Ref:992430)

Having said that, there's a story from the Indy Star with slightly different figures and a considerably more negative look at things. Lies, damned lies and stastics?

rustyfan · 3 Jun 2004, 09:52 (Ref:992452)

Quote:

Originally posted by Testure
Having said that, there's a story from the Indy Star with slightly different figures and a considerably more negative look at things. Lies, damned lies and stastics?

Yeah I saw the same numbers in an article posted over at That's Racin' (based on the same original AP article).

Tim Northcutt · 3 Jun 2004, 12:39 (Ref:992657)

Quote:

Originally posted by sgw2
Tim,

I watched on TV. Yeah, the seats were mostly filled up before the rain. I should have used the word smattering to qualify my statement. It was nearly full, but by no means a sellout - that is something new.

That said, I think IRL is far healtheir than OWRS, but not really healthy. The inability to find sponsors is telling. Getting TV numbers and month long interest is required. That means more than 26 cars have to be ready to run on pole day. It means 25-30 cars need to be runninng the serie sregularily.

What I meant to say, is lets not be compalcant with the notion that CCWS is dying therefore IRL can sit on their bums and reap the benefits. As we have seen there has been precious little gain from CCWS' losses. And they don't have much left to lose.

Were I running a business and my competitor collapsed, losing half his market, but my sales were flat, then I'd call it a crisis and demand a direction be taken to grow my company's sales and now.

The complaint I have is the lack luster IRL management, which seems incapable of explotation and growth. Of course this looks good compared to the amatuer hour over at OWRS and before it Pook and Heitzler at CART. But it is mediocre at best compared to NASCAR. And that is whom you have to measure against, beacuse that is who the sponsors measure against.

I guess my mind is in the same mode as Roger Penske. Status quo is not acceptable anymore for IRL. Growth and now before you lose the manufacturers and sponsors to NASCAR.

I would agree with virtually all of your points....but The Race was announced as a sell-out here....

and scalpers seemed to be getting their hits...much moreso than last year at the event....

2003 was not a sell-out.....and people were lined up at the ticket wickets Race Day morning buying tickets....

But on everything else, I agree 400%.....make that 4,000%

Growth and viability will be a huge key to ensure long-term financial health....and the iRL is going to have to get very creative and think outside of the box to do it....business as usual is not going to cut it...not even close...not even remotely close....

I certainly don't think that the iRl is on life-support, but stagnation is not a good thing, and should be a wake-up call for the IRL to make things happen and move in a positive direction...
______________________________________________________
Personally, I'm very interested in seeing what kind of crowd shows up at Texas....the crowds have been good there....

and I'm also interested in seeing how well the telecast does since it is a night race....

I haven't paid much attention to the ratings for the Texas race in the past....

But the ratings from the "500" didn't bother me...and I expected them to be below NASCAR for the overall....

It takes a die-hard to stick with a telecast for that long....

ABC/ESPN loves what they have, or they wouldn't have extended the agreement....

and the deal brings in cash that goes into the Series....unlike others, who are paying for the time and are producing a terrible telecast of their events....

ABC's telecast was stellar....and the new camera angles and options really added flavor to the coverage of the event....

I also feel that the new aero package and the new engine configuration is going to make the racing even better....it sure was on Sunday compared to 2003, even though the cars were about 7-10 mph faster last year than they were this year during the Race....

Those things spell good potential.....

Now it is up to the IRL to exploit that potential to stimimulate growth....

Snrub · 3 Jun 2004, 15:59 (Ref:992852)

From the TV it didn't look like a sold out crowd, but it was definately pretty close. There seemed like there was some of the old buzz in the air this year and the fans got to see a good show.

jhansen · 3 Jun 2004, 16:46 (Ref:992896)

Indy was never going to outdraw the Coke 600 in terms of TV ratings. I didn't buy the overnight ratings numbers when I heard them. As for fans in the stands, that's tough. I've seen many arguments on the sportscar forum about true attendence for the 24 Hours of Daytona and the 12 Hours of Sebring. It's really tough to get a sense from TV coverage. And it's tough to know what the promoter calls a sellout. Semantics can run rampent sometimes.

In the end, it's all neither here nor there. The race received decent TV ratings despite the rain delays and running for 8 hours. The fan count was good. And most importantly the race was awesome!

Side note: Can't wait to see the new engine-aero package at Texas. It should make the racing even closer, which is insane considering it's Texas!

rush1 · 3 Jun 2004, 16:47 (Ref:992898)

It was a long day, but I think the outcome was solid for the IRL. An American driver and well known car owner winning the race will be a shot in the arm for the IRL.It even made the fron page of the New York Times. One of the reasons I like Indy Car racing is the diverse nationalities that compete in the series. But for the series to grow it MUST have marketable American drivers. Now we might have a good one with Rice. If he could develop a rivalry with Hornish it would be even better.

jhansen · 3 Jun 2004, 17:10 (Ref:992919)

It amazes me how closed minded the American people can be. I'm a race fan and I want to see racing. I have no particular interest in where the drivers are from. I am, however, interested in seeing the best driving talent the IRL can get (yes some American drivers have been passed over). In the end I don't believe the sponsors even care where the drivers are from. If people are tuned in to the TV set then sponsors will line up.

It boggels my mind that race fans would rather watch a race that looks like a cross between a parking lot jam and destruction durby. The IRL is featuring highly competitive and close racing at intensely fast speeds. And folks, it's open wheel racing! It's just no comparison. But I guess I'm just not the "normal" American race fan either.

rush1 · 3 Jun 2004, 17:27 (Ref:992939)

Quote:

Originally posted by jhansen
It amazes me how closed minded the American people can be. I'm a race fan and I want to see racing. I have no particular interest in where the drivers are from. I am, however, interested in seeing the best driving talent the IRL can get (yes some American drivers have been passed over). In the end I don't believe the sponsors even care where the drivers are from. If people are tuned in to the TV set then sponsors will line up.

It boggels my mind that race fans would rather watch a race that looks like a cross between a parking lot jam and destruction durby. The IRL is featuring highly competitive and close racing at intensely fast speeds. And folks, it's open wheel racing! It's just no comparison. But I guess I'm just not the "normal" American race fan either.

I wonder how popular F1 would be in Germany without the Schumacher brothers or any other German in the starting grid. If all the F1 events were held in Germany save one race there might be a serious problem. The IRL doesn't race on four continents in 10 different countries. Its races are in the US except for 1 in Japan. It needs some solid American drivers to compete against NASCAR. I don't care about nationality as well, but many race fans in America and around the world do seem to care.

jhansen · 3 Jun 2004, 17:49 (Ref:992961)

It's too bad the "product" isn't well received by racing fans here. I find it difficult to believe that viewership is tied soley to a lack of American talent, but I guess I'm wrong.

I would love to hear from someone in the know (hint Team Owner) as to why the American drivers are not more successful at landing rides. Is it that the drivers outside the United States have a better development system? Do they have more money? Are they better at finding money? Is it the perception from team owners?

This seems like a real chicken and egg mess to me. If an American driver is out looking for sponsorship backing the sponsor will say "where's the ratings?" But the ratings are not there because Amercians are not watching because of lack of home grown talent? There has to be more to it than that. I'm confused.

Tim Northcutt · 3 Jun 2004, 18:53 (Ref:993016)

Quote:

Originally posted by jhansen
It amazes me how closed minded the American people can be. I'm a race fan and I want to see racing. I have no particular interest in where the drivers are from. I am, however, interested in seeing the best driving talent the IRL can get (yes some American drivers have been passed over). In the end I don't believe the sponsors even care where the drivers are from. If people are tuned in to the TV set then sponsors will line up.

It boggels my mind that race fans would rather watch a race that looks like a cross between a parking lot jam and destruction durby. The IRL is featuring highly competitive and close racing at intensely fast speeds. And folks, it's open wheel racing! It's just no comparison. But I guess I'm just not the "normal" American race fan either.

Couldn't have said it better myself, jhansen....

I couldn't care less where Kanaan, Scheckter, or whomever is from....if he's fast and talented, I want to watch him race the best of the rest in his class and to go for it....

via CLEAN racing.....you can't "swap paint" in an open-wheeler or you'll get a face full of SAFER barrier....

mountainstar · 3 Jun 2004, 21:00 (Ref:993198)

The final rating for the 500 is 4.1. For those of you that are not familar with the tv business the first ratings from the weekend are released on monday or tuesday and those are just a sketchy estimate. The final ratings are released on thursday and friday and are usually lower than the first rating.

Spin it anyway you want, 4.1 stinks.

Tim Northcutt · 3 Jun 2004, 21:04 (Ref:993203)

It's not good....

Neither is 5.0 for NASCAR.....

I wonder what other sports programming drew for ratings and shares on Sunday.....

Hazza · 3 Jun 2004, 23:29 (Ref:993323)

Okay by comparison can someone offer to me what the ratings for

an early 90s 500 was
a mid 90s CART race (say, 95)
and a late 90s CART race (About 99)

how do they compare? Is it possible to get thoose statistics?

mountainstar · 4 Jun 2004, 03:18 (Ref:993443)

Quote:

Originally posted by Hazza
Okay by comparison can someone offer to me what the ratings for

an early 90s 500 was
a mid 90s CART race (say, 95)
and a late 90s CART race (About 99)

how do they compare? Is it possible to get thoose statistics?

1992 Indy 500 was a 10.9
mid 90s CART race ran between a 2.0 and 3.0
late 90s CART race ran between 1.5 and 2.0

Testure · 4 Jun 2004, 10:53 (Ref:993718)

Here's a page with a history of 500 TV ratings: http://www.geocities.com/johnsonindy...500/imstv.html You can see that it's been going steadily downhill since the mid 80's, but is, undeniably, still a popular event.

Tim Northcutt · 4 Jun 2004, 13:23 (Ref:993864)

Did anyone give a "Share" number for the telecast????

For those not afmiliar with how these work:

A "Rating" is the approximate number of sets or households tuned in to a telecast when compared to an approximation of all of the households or TV sets in the sample markets that exist...whether they are turned on or turned off...

A "Share" is the number of households/sets tuned in compared to the households.sets that are turned on and are receiving a telecast from any channel....

Share numbers tell an equally important story...especially over a holiday weekend....

GP Racer · 4 Jun 2004, 19:59 (Ref:994183)

Every sport, beside NASCAR and pro football, are down in the ratings. There is simply to many forms of entertainment competing for your leisure time today, that weren't around only 10 years ago.

Its very likely we will never see the numbers that we used to, but that doesn't mean the event or the series is a failure. If it was, why would ABC pick-up the series for another 5 years?

I'm done with the doom and gloom, and am looking to a great future for the race and the series, numbers be damned. They don't tell the whole story...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Poor TV ratings for AGP	Head Rev	Australasian Touring Cars.	58	13 Apr 2006 11:43
Attendance and TV Ratings so Far	Snrub	ChampCar World Series	226	3 Sep 2005 22:00
TV Ratings	Down F0rce	IRL Indycar Series	3	14 Mar 2005 02:04
Driver Ratings	BrazilianFan	ChampCar World Series	6	27 Mar 2004 10:43
Lineup Ratings	golem	Formula One	19	5 Mar 2004 11:12