Edmonton not good in the ratings department

[Disciple]

How can you use the word accuracy when you still think TMS had a great crowd? Seriously, you should REALLY eliminate crowd quantifying out of your posts, given your record in that arena. It seems every year there's a race or two where you feel compelled to embellish crowd size. Weird, IMO. We all know that subsets of a TV rating matter. We also know that subsets are smaller than the whole. That means with a whole of <200,000 ALL OF THE SUBSETS ARE VERY, VERY LOW. Apologies for the personal nature of this post, but how does one refute specific points without addressing them? I would love it if we could add a new policy here: If posters are going to refute facts, they should supply facts that make that argument. Wait... that sounds an awful lot like the current policies.

You (and many other internet forum contributors) have taken a stance that 12+ overnights spell utter and complete doom for IndyCar. That's fine. Watching those machinations is entertaining to me. In the actual commerce of television advertising 12+ overnights mean little to nothing. What counts is how actual numbers are used to facilitate the sale of the spots. Demographic targets. How much it costs to reach a specific number of the types of eyeballs desired. It would be nice to have conversations using those numbers but frankly we can't unless someone who has paid for the research offers them up. And even if they did I would imagine discussion of actual television commerce items like price types, ratecards, demo sets, impressions, GRPs, CPMs, VPVHs, etc., would be even more comical than the mass screeching that results when someone tweets out an overnight.

I am not against discussing facts when facts are available. It is just that the facts must be made available on which to base intelligent observation first. Anything else, at least here, is merely subjective hysteria.

Further, the vast majority of cable programming falls into the same bucket. I'd like to believe in wide-eyed pie-in-the-sky 12+ overnight increases too, and I offered some suggestions about how to bump it up in post(s) above.

With regard to Texas attendance, that actually was a really good crowd. Of course it was not as big as the 'good old days.' Nothing is. And given the needlessly strained relationship between the management of the track and IndyCar what does anyone reasonably expect? If you look at the season as a whole, attendance numbers are not bad. We are not experiencing the kind of dramatic falloff, for example, that much of NASCAR is.

Television ratings are important. But 12+ overnights remain only fodder for sweeping generalization, most of which is based on the dangerous combination of ignorance and pessimism.

-The Way I See It Disciple of INDYCAR

[Muskie4041]

Never change Disciple. Never change.

[SoundMan360]

Show us some numbers that look good then.

Otherwise please drop the nonsense.

TIA.


Really good crowd... right?

You (and many other internet forum contributors) have taken a stance that 12+ overnights spell utter and complete doom for IndyCar. That's fine. Watching those machinations is entertaining to me. In the actual commerce of television advertising 12+ overnights mean little to nothing. What counts is how actual numbers are used to facilitate the sale of the spots. Demographic targets. How much it costs to reach a specific number of the types of eyeballs desired. It would be nice to have conversations using those numbers but frankly we can't unless someone who has paid for the research offers them up. And even if they did I would imagine discussion of actual television commerce items like price types, ratecards, demo sets, impressions, GRPs, CPMs, VPVHs, etc., would be even more comical than the mass screeching that results when someone tweets out an overnight.

I am not against discussing facts when facts are available. It is just that the facts must be made available on which to base intelligent observation first. Anything else, at least here, is merely subjective hysteria.

Further, the vast majority of cable programming falls into the same bucket. I'd like to believe in wide-eyed pie-in-the-sky 12+ overnight increases too, and I offered some suggestions about how to bum it up in post(s) above.

With regard to Texas attendance, that actually was a really good crowd. Of course it was not as big as the 'good old days.' Nothing is. And given the needlessly strained relationship between the management of the track and IndyCar what does anyone reasonably expect? If you look at the season as a whole, attendance numbers are not bad. We are not experiencing the kind of dramatic falloff, for example, that much of NASCAR is.

Television ratings are important. But 12+ overnights remain only fodder for sweeping generalization, most of which is based on the dangerous combination of ignorance and pessimism.

-The Way I See It Disciple of INDYCAR

[Disciple]

Yep. Those humble beginning. In Long Island, NY

By the way, how's that Long Island track doing these days?

If we're striving for accuracy about when racing began we need to go a lot further back.

Really good crowd... right?

Correct. That crowd would have overflowed Milwaukee or Iowa and been considered great at a street event. It's all in your perspective. I am optimistic Randy will work hard to enhance his relationship with Eddie Gossage. Most fans want that.

-The Whip Slapping Disciple of INDYCAR

[SoundMan360]

btw... Silverstone was sold out for the British GP, that's actually MORE people paying to attend than "the good old days". Paying more $$$ per ticket as well. On a weekend with TERRIBLE weather. Yet they sold more tix for the 3 day weekend than IMS did for Carb day and Race day.

[Disciple]

Good for them. From what I saw on television, however, many of them must have been under the stands out of the weather or going to the loo or buying refreshments.

-The Aluminum Knows No Country Boundaries Disciple of INDYCAR

[SoundMan360]

so, to summarize.... .14=normal, not bad. 25k=70k. Sellouts? Impossible. Those ratings we've been looking at are nonsense. And you have no other numbers to show us.

Is that a fair assessment of your posts? Oh... and you think massive changes are in order, as long as nothing changes.

Right?

-Please stop naming yourself. It's just foolish.

[houstonracefan]

what were the ratings in Brazil?

[Disciple]

so, to summarize.... .14=normal, not bad.

Correct. Normal. 'Bad' is a subjective word. If one is prone to shrieking, pessimism and obsessed with what they feel may be certain, imminent death, 'bad' is certainly apt. In the real world of cable television programming, such numbers are 'normal.' And, as stated previously, the majority of us would like to see them rise.

25k=70k. Sellouts? Impossible.

At Texas, Indy or any ISC/SMI overbuilt oval? No. At Milwaukee, Iowa, Memphis, PPIR or a host of more reasonably sized venues and most road or street courses? Yes.

Those ratings we've been looking at are nonsense. And you have no other numbers to show us.

12+ overnights are actually nonsense in the world of television commerce. No, I do not have numbers to show you unless someone who purchased the research offers them up for open discussion. Thus far no one has. Is there any part of that caveat you cannot grasp?

Is that a fair assessment of your posts?

No. It appears to be a sweeping assessment based on a predisposed set of subjective criteria.

Oh... and you think massive changes are in order, as long as nothing changes. Right?

No. Not massive changes. Strategic ones. When I opined my philosophy had changed to wanting the whole thing to collapse I was being facetious, but evidently not obvious enough. Seriously, however, I wish they would let Randy do what he can. The way in which he is hamstrung by Belskus and regularly undercut by too many in the paddock has a detrimental effect on his effectiveness. If he can't do it there is probably no one who can. I would be happy if was allowed to kick arses instead being made to kiss them; e.g., ESPN, the entire France family, etc..

-Please stop naming yourself. It's just foolish.

-The Throwback Sigs Go Back To IRace Disciple of INDYCAR

[cpthornman]

-The Accuracy Counts Disciple of INDYCAR

I snipped your post to lessen the scrolling. Anywho, what do you think about CBS at a potential partner? They really don't have any "big time" racing series' I can think of and I have always been a fan of their broadcasts.

[SoundMan360]

Good for them. From what I saw on television, however, many of them must have been under the stands out of the weather or going to the loo or buying refreshments.

-The Aluminum Knows No Country Boundaries Disciple of INDYCAR

Ok... we're narrowing down where the disparities may lie. We'll get there!









I think we can narrow it down to poor vision or a poor TV



Because here we have a packed house, yet you see aluminum. Whereas here we have aluminum:



And you see a good crowd.

Interesting.

[Disciple]

I snipped your post to lessen the scrolling. Anywho, what do you think about CBS at a potential partner? They really don't have any "big time" racing series' I can think of and I have always been a fan of their broadcasts.

It would depend entirely on the commitment of their effort. If they approached it like ESPN has approached NASCAR since the very early 90s I would be all for it.

-The Big Eyed Disciple of INDYCAR

[cpthornman]

It would depend entirely on the commitment of their effort. If they approached it like ESPN has approached NASCAR since the very early 90s I would be all for it.

-The Big Eyed Disciple of INDYCAR

Oh yeah..that effort part. I almost forgot. Personally though I think they would because they advertise the hell out of their programming. They have a massive amount of viewership as well. Probably more than abc with as many award winning shows they have. It would be better than abc/bspn I think.

[cpthornman]

Ok... we're narrowing down where the disparities may lie. We'll get there!
I think we can narrow it down to poor vision or a poor TV

Because here we have a packed house, yet you see aluminum. Whereas here we have aluminum:
And you see a good crowd.

Interesting.

You're completely missing his point. What is TMS was built for 3 million people and only 1 showed? 1 million is still a ton but it wouldn't look like it because it would only be 1/3 of the available grandstands.
Disciple is right about TMS and that they have severely overbuilt their grandstands. At the peak of nascar yeah they would fill but no racing series is filling those stands anymore.
It's all about the density of a crowd. The reason Silverstone looks packed is because those stands are insanley massive like they are at TMS. Put that crowd in the TMS stands and it will look like the IICS too.

You're basing your judgement purely on what you're seeing and well we all know looks can be deceiving.

[Disciple]

I think we can narrow it down to poor vision or a poor TV

Seriously, that's a great crowd to see a world class series that does not race 14 times a summer in their country. Who knew that Formula One was popular in Europe? I'm actually curious to see how it plays in Austin. My prediction: Great in year one and 2...enough to keep it going through year 5, then they try to raise the price and are gone. I also believe F-1 in New Jersey will never happen unless wholesale outright bribing of government officials occurs early and often.

-The Cup Of Tea Drinking Disciple of INDYCAR

[SoundMan360]

You're completely missing his point. What is TMS was built for 3 million people and only 1 showed? 1 million is still a ton but it wouldn't look like it because it would only be 1/3 of the available grandstands.
Disciple is right about TMS and that they have severely overbuilt their grandstands. At the peak of nascar yeah they would fill but no racing series is filling those stands anymore.
It's all about the density of a crowd. The reason Silverstone looks packed is because those stands are insanley massive like they are at TMS. Put that crowd in the TMS stands and it will look like the IICS too.

You're basing your judgement purely on what you're seeing and well we all know looks can be deceiving.

I can understand what a large grandstand looks like with varying quantities of people in it. That's not what's happening here. The stands that TMS uses for IICS seat about 130k. They announced, and Dicsiple agrees with, a figure of 69k. Which means roughly 1 in 2 seats should be full of humans. The skyboxes have a capacity of no more than 12k. The photos of TMS I chose actually show the better populated areas. Others are void of humanity. There is no infield crowd to speak of, excepting the RVs.

69,000 is simply fiction. Or it's tix distributed, with a TON of freebies. This isn't partisanship on my part, I like IICS racing and want it to do better in this area. But in order to focus on fixing the parties involved must recognize a need for fixing. Each and every comment made that hides this reality is just hurting the series, IMO.

The reason Silverstone's 125k capacity grandstands looked packed was because a lot of people bought tix and fought the weather to go. It is not an illusion.

Look at the TMS pix. What type of density do you see? Do you see 1 in 2 or even 1 in 3 seats full? I sure don't. Even 20% seems high. Let's assume that EVERY suite seat was full, and count that as 12k (an INSANE assumption, btw.... ) Let's round it out and say that leaves 50k in stands.

Do you buy that?

[cpthornman]

The reason Silverstone's 125k capacity grandstands looked packed was because a lot of people bought tix and fought the weather to go. It is not an illusion.

That's because F1 is a completely different beast. That's the only big time race they get to go to for the whole year. It's a completely different situation.

Look at the TMS pix. What type of density do you see? Do you see 1 in 2 or even 1 in 3 seats full? I sure don't. Even 20% seems high. Let's assume that EVERY suite seat was full, and count that as 12k (an INSANE assumption, btw.... ) Let's round it out and say that leaves 50k in stands.

I see a few dense patches here and there but mostly scattered about. You're still basing this all on how it looks. Like I said, pretty much any crowd (under 100K) these days is going to look sparse in those stands. Considering the economy and the relevance of racing these days in the states, I think the crowd at TMS wasn't too bad.

[SoundMan360]

That's because F1 is a completely different beast. That's the only big time race they get to go to for the whole year. It's a completely different situation.



I see a few dense patches here and ther but mostly scattered about. You're still basing this all on how it looks. Like I said, pretty much any crowd (under 100K) is going to look sparse in those stands. Considering the economy and the relevance of racing these days in the states, I think the crowd at TMS wasn't too bad.

You'd rather I comment on the crowd size based on their sound or fragrance?



Of course it's by looking at it.

You haven't answered my question though. What kind of density do you see?





Give me a number. 50%?

45%?

40%?

Or closer to 20%?

Look at the seats under the Suites. Look at the low rows and the right.

Is even ONE section 50% full? ONE??? No, but many are less tha 10% full.

Do the math.

[cpthornman]

You'd rather I comment on the crowd size based on their sound or fragrance?



Of course it's by looking at it.

And ignore the numbers?

You haven't answered my question though. What kind of density do you see?

Give me a number. 50%?

45%?

40%?

Or closer to 20%?

To be honest it's so spread out I can't really tell.

[Red Byrd]

Oh, so now it's the stands' fault? We should all be asking ourselves why crowds of 128,000 showed up twice yearly to Texas in the late 1990's in the midst of the AOW war, and "69,000" is all that showed up with a unified sport and the internet.

[SoundMan360]

Maybe a visual aid will help.



In the above photo, the number of squares occupied by a chip of either color is:

A) 40
B) 15
C) 75
D) 69,000
E) Nothing but Aluminum

[cpthornman]

Oh, so now it's the stands' fault? We should all be asking ourselves why crowds of 128,000 showed up twice yearly to Texas in the late 1990's in the midst of the AOW war, and "69,000" is all that showed up with a unified sport and the internet.

Not blaming the stands at all. What I am saying is that in this day in age they are just too big. Like Disciple has been saying, you put that crowd at Iowa or Milwaukee and it would looked packed.
I would say the economy and the priorities of society changing is what changed things. The car isn't what it used to be as well. In terms of a symbol that is. The economy really killed the car here. Everyone wants economy now over performance it seems.
And I would say we are still feeling effects of the split a little in terms of attendance. They aren't all going to come back just all of the sudden.

[SoundMan360]

And ignore the numbers?



To be honest it's so spread out I can't really tell.

Your choice is to ignore the numbers or to accept them as given. The 69k figure was given out by the track, according to the reporter who reported it (I emailed him).

"it's so spread out"... that's another way of saying "there's an incredible amount of empty seats"! Please, take a moment and make an estimate. Personally, I would think if every row was 1/2 full, it would be hard to tell the difference between full or not. People spread out to give themselves space when available. IOW, a half full TMS crowd would still look very impressive to the eye.

This is not that. 1 in 5 is probably generous IMO.

[SoundMan360]

Oh, so now it's the stands' fault? We should all be asking ourselves why crowds of 128,000 showed up twice yearly to Texas in the late 1990's in the midst of the AOW war, and "69,000" is all that showed up with a unified sport and the internet.

I just scanned through some admittedly poor quality recordings of the TMS races I have. I'm beginning to think there never really were any 100k crowds at TMS. Even the years that look like good crowds have the bottom 8-10 rows closed off and some sparse sections. Still, a much, much larger crowd than today.

[cpthornman]

Your choice is to ignore the numbers or to accept them as given. The 69k figure was given out by the track, according to the reporter who reported it (I emailed him).

Yeah and in the context of the times I would say 69k isn't too bad.

"it's so spread out"... that's another way of saying "there's an incredible amount of empty seats"!

Now you're just twisting my words in to what you want me to say. When I say spread out I say I see a fairly even distribution of empty seats against occupied ones. Now obviously the ends of the grandstands are going to screw that ratio up a bit. I'm still not going to make an estimate because there are simply too many variables at play. (cautions, people at concessions, heat, etc) What we see in the stands changes constantly throughout the race.

[SoundMan360]

Yeah and in the context of the times I would say 69k isn't too bad.



Now you're just twisting my words in to what you want me to say. When I say spread out I say I see a fairly even distribution of empty seats against occupied ones. Now obviously the ends of the grandstands are going to screw that ratio up a bit. I'm still not going to make an estimate because there are simply too many variables at play. (cautions, people at concessions, heat, etc) What we see in the stands changes constantly throughout the race.

I wouldn't say 69k is bad either. Fictitious, for sure, but not a bad size crowd.

btw, you're not seeing the ends of the stands. That is dead center. The ends are empty.

May I submit to you that 30,000 people don't go pee at once.

Seriously, it looks 50% full to you in those sections?

[cpthornman]

btw, you're not seeing the ends of the stands. That is dead center. The ends are empty.

Hence my "Now obviously the ends of the grandstands are going to screw that ratio up a bit" sentence.

Seriously, it looks 50% full to you in those sections?

If you packed them all into one area and compared I think it would be fairly close.

[SoundMan360]

From the shot earlier taken from Rubens pit.

Top 15 rows have a density <10% ( a lot less IMO), ditto the bottom 10 rows.
I can't imagine any of the middle sections looks even a third full to you. We wouldn't see all those blue or red seats otherwise.

btw, this is past S/F, about 1/2 way to turn 1.

[cpthornman]

From the shot earlier taken from Rubens pit.

Top 15 rows have a density <10% ( a lot less IMO), ditto the bottom 10 rows.
I can't imagine any of the middle sections looks even a third full to you. We wouldn't see all those blue or red seats otherwise.

btw, this is past S/F, about 1/2 way to turn 1.

I'm done arguing estimation with you. You keep changing shots every time you mention it. You asked me to estimate that particular photo and I did. Then you use a totally separate one at a different place and time to "prove me wrong?" Be consistent at least.
The numbers are the only thing that matter to me these days. Now what they need to do is close off rows and stuff to make the crowd look more dense. And they could probably sell ad space on those closed sections.

[SoundMan360]

The other side of S/F, headed towards T4. Lots of empty rows, is even ONE ROW even kinda full?

Seriously.... in all of these pics... is there even ONE ROW in ONE SECTION that looks kinda full?