TV ratings for Sonoma?

[VirtualBalboa]

One million fewer people tune in per race in 2012 than did in 1998. That is a very significant number.

When you lose 65% of your audience by switching networks it isn't a good thing, despite what those in the industry tell us.

They're also on network TV less in 2012 than 1998 (less 500 coverage by ABC, 6 races on network TV vs. 7in 1998). The average network TV rating for an Indycar race in 1999 was a shade under 1.5 (w/o the 500). This year's average network TV rating minus Indy was a shade under .8. Now I'm sure Defender will remind us about the World Series ratings and how that hasn't made it more difficult for teams to cut regional and national cable deals worth enormous amounts of money. Then again, MLB offers consistently higher numbers than does Indycar could, by his own admission, hope to probably ever draw. And they obviously provide far more programming. If MLB could only manage a .7 for playoff series and a 3.9 for the World Series, they probably wouldn't be getting billions of dollars in TV money. Since Indycar on cable apparently = test pattern, they'll be lucky to get much of anything at renewal, should they make it that far. They certainly aren't in a position now to demand increased airtime or a restructuring of the contract in their favor because their existence on NBC Sports means nothing as to its continued placement in cable/satellite systems, unlike say, MLB.

[PenelopePitstop]

Really? That's funny to you?

Yeah, in a 'you can't be serious' kind of way. The ratings are either a legitimate way of determining value/popularity or they aren't. Watching someone skitter around claiming they are either depending on the way the numbers work out is amusing to me. The low ratings numbers are not.

[Ajax]

Oh, so he did not say anything about Indycar making those millions that you referenced. Nice deflection with the same result --- nothing.

The reality is the numbers are dropping yet you call the deal 'ahead of its time'. The only end result that can be drerived from that is the series will be broke 'ahead of its time'. This is the reality of the MSNBC Sports contract as it applies to Indycar.

I had to log in just to add this last part as my sig - just fantastic!

Now it's off to Minot (lame).

[Todd Gack]

The ratings are either a legitimate way of determining value/popularity or they aren't.

Last time I checked, TV shows usually got cancelled when nobody TV ratings were bad.

So, they must mean something.

[Todd Gack]

Get back to me with the demo breakouts.

Do you even need "demo breakouts" when only 300,000 people are bothering to tune in?

Nobody likes this sport. Old people don't. Young people don't. White guys don't. Black guys don't. Hispanics don't. Males don't. Females don't. Educated don't. Uneducated don't.

Literally the only people watching are members of TrackForum and a few bloggers.

[steal your face]

I feel furious contemplation then followed by typing going on from someone. Patiently awaiting his reply!

[doitagain]

There's a new race this weekend, folks. Time to move on

[Todd Gack]

There's a new race this weekend, folks. Time to move on

Yep, and the cars are getting 'mad air' jumping the choo choo train tracks.

I'll watch again in 2 weeks when they get back on a real race track, built for race cars.

[FlatOut]

12+ overnights were just as worthless from a commerce standpoint in 1998 as they are now.

Then may I ask, why do you use 12+ overnights now and breakouts as a measure when dealing with .2 ratings? They may be worthless to you, but the numbers of overnights dont lie. Let alone, when finals come out, they are even lower then the overnight. So the final numbers are worthless I suppose, based on you saying overnights mean nothing.

And the entire world was different too.

The world is different every day. Some prosper, some sustain, some sink. Whats your point?

Look, from what I gather you are young and just full of p!ss and vinegar.

Thats your opinion. And why make it personal? And why make a statement of someone being full of pis*, if they are 'young'? Why would they? Shouldn't by your definition of being a certain way, to young to give an opinion or cast an opinion of what they see?

I like that. Even admire it. But you need some experience. That takes time. You probably have more than I do. Don't waste it.

You have no idea of this persons experience above. And yet you make it personal to said person and even try and belittle the person.

.1 and .2's. And you need to tell everyone they need to learn? They learned. They did by showing in the stands and TV ratings.
How you defend this is beyond reality, IMO.


-The Gently Toying Disciple of INDYCAR[/QUOTE]