I wonder what the sponsors think of four-wide (1 Viewer)

[Professor Dave]

If I were a sponsor, I'd see one upside and and two downsides. The upside is that for the fans who go for the sights and sounds of the nitro cars, four are are better than two at a time, so there might me more of those types of fans and I'm sure that's what NHRA likes too.

Now for the two down sides. First, the maximum number of times the car I'm sponsoring can be on TV is three times on Sunday, rather than three. Second, there are fewer TV close-ups of cars in four-wide, so it is harder for the TV fans to see the name of my product. Seriously folks, how many of you saw who Doug Herbert's new sponsor was when he made his passes? I'm waiting to hear what the marketing people who watched this "novelty" (that's a quote for Tim Wilkerson and he indicated that he was being politically correct, so I can only imagine what he really thinks of it) think of "we can't see our product's name on the car when it goes down the track on TV."

 

[Tim5636sc]

I don't think it matters Professor Dave.

It's about their ROI in "SALES", profit achieved through their marketing efforts. The concept of the 'sticker on the car' and 'on track time' are old school thoughts. There is SO much more potential to maximize a marketing partnership between a driver and company which has not been explored in our sport...(YET).

I don't think, and this is just my opinion, one less round or two more cars on the track really matter. I do not believe the average consumer going to decide not to buy a product because there were a few other cars on the track or they see it one less time.

 

[d'kid]

Think that's the inherent problem with the sport generally, this foreplay thing makes it worst (love it when I coin a phrase). That's the major reason I don't mind the standard JFR/DSR style top end "inner-view", the few times I even watch a portion of a race on TV a season. I do know who sponsors Whom, and I try to support them.

But Honestly, 4 to 6 seconds of run time, and ten minutes of total on track time for a whole weekend? It's the eyeballs in the pits that make it pay.

Just my buck and a half worth.

d'kid

 

[PJ]

I had to make sure I paid attention to who was in what lane before they started up. Once they took off the camera was 12 miles away and I didn't know who was who then.

 

[rocketman]

It seems to me that Irwin Tools got a lot of exposure on TV today. If I was a sponsor I would be more concerned with all of the empty seats!

 

[e-town iceyman]

It seems to me that Irwin Tools got a lot of exposure on TV today. If I was a sponsor I would be more concerned with all of the empty seats!

saturday was hugeeeee... today it shudve rained 3 hours earlier... 10 miles west was raining since 7 am

 

[Ma Green]

My opinion is that spectators came for 2 reasons....1) to experience the sound and fury of 32,000 horsepower, and 2) to be there for the first one. I found it very confusing to watch, trying to figure out who was doing what, when. As mentioned, you didn't get as many up-close-&-personal shots of each car and really couldn't tell who was in what lane part of the time.

I know some of the crews just want to get the heck out of there and were glad not to have to wait around for Monday. I hope NHRA doesn't let Bruton dictate what they run at his tracks. Once a year is quite enough.

 

[G'ginna]

I don't think it matters Professor Dave.

It's about their ROI in "SALES", profit achieved through their marketing efforts. The concept of the 'sticker on the car' and 'on track time' are old school thoughts. There is SO much more potential to maximize a marketing partnership between a driver and company which has not been explored in our sport...(YET).

I don't think, and this is just my opinion, one less round or two more cars on the track really matter. I do not believe the average consumer going to decide not to buy a product because there were a few other cars on the track or they see it one less time.

Oh, ya. It's such an old school thought that NASCAR spends time after every race counting the seconds that a sponsor's name gets screen time. Bottom line to remember, Marketing 101, marketing is an investment. Most sponsors aren't doing this out of the goodness of their heart, they have a need or a goal and put money up to get the name/brand recognition in front of the public. In difficult economic times, you can bet they are going to take a look at their perceived value per dollar, just as any intelligent consumer should. If the consumer doesn't see as much of it as the sponsor thinks they should, the sponsor will find another venue.

 

[mastertone]

It seems to me that Irwin Tools got a lot of exposure on TV today. If I was a sponsor I would be more concerned with all of the empty seats!

That place wasn't even half full!

 

[Namely Nick]

My 90% On screen time for sponsors has suffered for years, just when you think you might catch a glimpse of your logo on a tight shot..BOOM,,,ESPN graphics. (just because you have the technology, doesn’t mean you have to use it) 4 wide + wide shots =less corp logos, and where will that help? In a sport that is trying to bring in “new” blood (paying public) why make it more complicated? When was the last time you tried to explain to someone why the car that crossed the finish line first was the loser?
The other 10% K.I.S.S. “KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID” 1000 feet?? If it’s safer, I’m for it

 

[jackass]

Oh, ya. It's such an old school thought that NASCAR spends time after every race counting the seconds that a sponsor's name gets screen time. Bottom line to remember, Marketing 101, marketing is an investment. Most sponsors aren't doing this out of the goodness of their heart, they have a need or a goal and put money up to get the name/brand recognition in front of the public. In difficult economic times, you can bet they are going to take a look at their perceived value per dollar, just as any intelligent consumer should. If the consumer doesn't see as much of it as the sponsor thinks they should, the sponsor will find another venue.

I'm with you Georginna.... i've been around some heavy hitters in advertising over the years... and the thing they have to know first from any event, motorsports, golf, baseball etc.. is whats the Joyce Julis reports have to say... and was it better than the last one. they want to know if they got exposure(impressions) to a number of people that fits their "cost per impression" target price....


Billy

 

[Tim5636sc]

I'm with you Georginna.... i've been around some heavy hitters in advertising over the years... and the thing they have to know first from any event, motorsports, golf, baseball etc.. is whats the Joyce Julis reports have to say... and was it better than the last one. they want to know if they got exposure(impressions) to a number of people that fits their "cost per impression" target price....


Billy

but Joyce Julis tracks ALL TV TIME.. Not just on track time correct Billy?

That's my point. It's not simply about the impact of the product ON THE TRACK, it's the exposure the team receives off the track, during the broadcast. This is why Force's "NUMBERS" are sooooo HIGH.

 

[Al smith]

unpopular demand

After this weekend I don't think Eustace Haney could sell this format

 

[G'ginna]

I'm with you Georginna.... i've been around some heavy hitters in advertising over the years... and the thing they have to know first from any event, motorsports, golf, baseball etc.. is whats the Joyce Julis reports have to say... and was it better than the last one. they want to know if they got exposure(impressions) to a number of people that fits their "cost per impression" target price....


Billy

Thanks Billy, for the life of me I couldn't remember what that report was called.

 

[jackass]

but Joyce Julis tracks ALL TV TIME.. Not just on track time correct Billy?

That's my point. It's not simply about the impact of the product ON THE TRACK, it's the exposure the team receives off the track, during the broadcast. This is why Force's "NUMBERS" are sooooo HIGH.

Correct... they look for all mentions or in-focus impressions.... but some companys consider a visual .. aka.. logo presence... as better than an verbal mention.... they seem to think of it as a subliminal tag to your buying train of thought.... go ahead laugh .. i did the first time i heard it too....lol....


the other problem is big corperations are use to the large numbers of in-focus times of their logos on tv for their measurement based on NASCAR when compared to other motorsports.. in our case drag racing... even the bottom end cup teams sponsor get more tv time than some of the top or middle of the road deals in drag racing.. thats just the nature of the beast.... they have hours on track for exposure we have seconds...


i agree that the biggest selling point for drag racing is the "in their face" direct promotion to all the fans that attend events..but those numbers don't add up to many companys numbers when you ask for "X" amount to sponsors a TF or NFC team. So to off set the amount of sponsorship needed we..... PRO teams... need the TV time to add up at all possible times... limiting possible of in focus tv time doesn't realy help.....


Billy