Ratings down for NHRA/ESPN2 show

[Prestaged]

Re: NHRA TV Ratings

And do we REALLY need to see EVERY burnout?

Good point. And if that is you in the avatar with JF, you could win a Donnie Bender lookalike contest. Not that there will ever be one.

 

[kingcobrafan]

SELLING IT THROUGH SOLID ADVERTISING OUTSIDE OF THE NHRA SHOW MIGHT THOUGH.

Spot on, Tim. It's such a no-brainer that NHRA can't possibly not know that's the way to go. If they're so cash-strapped that they can't or won't buy at least an occasional TV spot aside from the race broadcast, then the sport will surely stagnate til Doomsday.

 

[rollingthunder]

Re: NHRA TV Ratings

Why not see every burnout and every force story there is to be heard. That is what i keep reading and seeing is. That is the new demographic they are marketing too. The new fans don't know the difference and those that do are basically told if you don't like it then screw you.

 

[HEMI6point1]

Here's my opinion on this:

NHRA always had low TV ratings because as others mentioned, you just can't get the same "effect" watching it at home. There is no audio device to make the floor shake like that (Not even a Carver Sunfire subwoofer would work), and no one has come out with a device that releases the smell of Nitro in your house.

That said, here is my opinion on some things about the TV show and what they could do:

1. On the qualifying show, please make the main coverage the runs from the best session(s) and only show the later sessions as highlights if anyone improves. Topeka's qualifying show was TERRIBLE. Only good part was Ashley Force in that pink tank top at the end (sorry if that makes me sound like a 16 year old, but I'm just voicing my opinion).

2. Start showing those really great Full Throttle commercials and upcoming race ads outside of ESPN2, like on ABC and non-racing programs.

3. Stop showing 50 replays of a damn run.

4. A peek into a racer's off-track life who isn't a Force, Capps or Pedregon would be nice to see.

5. Okay, if they're not going to be made into a pro catagory at least integrate the Get Screened America pro mod series into the telecast. When I was at Gainseville I asked some fans around me if they would rather watch pro mod or pro stock. Almost all of them picked pro mod.

6. Do a feature on a sportman racer every telecast. The profile on the guy who was part of the famous hudson airplane crash (forget his name, sorry) was great.

7. Do a feature on a random sportsman class and feature a couple of rounds on the show, this will let viewers know there is more to NHRA than nitro burners and pro stockers.

8. START ON TIME! I am glad I set my DVR to record an hour over the time slot. When I watched E-town I had to speed through nearly an hour of collage baseball. Who gives a crap about collage baseball?!

 

[T.Smith]

8. START ON TIME! I am glad I set my DVR to record an hour over the time slot. When I watched E-town I had to speed through nearly an hour of collage baseball. Who gives a crap about collage baseball?!

I'd be willing to bet those games pull a better T.V. rating than your beloved nights coverage of drag racing. If it isn't, it's probably damn close.

 

[Raconteur]

Responding in general to this thread, I believe there are some things we all need to keep in mind.

I don’t know where Chris came up with the information that NHRA is paying $8M for the privilege of being on espn2, but I’d love to see confirmation of that. Otherwise it’s just another rumor.

Jon Asher

Jon

The money paid to ESPN is NOT a rumor.

You can confirm that information as a line item in the yearly NHRA Federal tax return published every Fall in the pages of Drag Racing Online, apparently that is where Chris found the info, too.

The fee paid to ESPN by NHRA has ranged between $8 Million and $10 Million per year.

See ya

Darr

 

[Anderson]

Well that just made mine and everybody elses job it is to sell our sport to new corporate sponsors about thirty three percent more difficult. ;-(
thanks guys...

Tim, in your opinion do you think that the replays help make it easier to sell sponsorship? I remember reading that one of the ways used to place value on sponsorship is to take the total amount of time a company's logo gets on TV then compare that time to the equivalent amount of time to buy a commercial spot on that network. Do the replays help pad those numbers by extending the time a sponsor's name is exposed?

Also it was mentioned on here that the lack of consistent favorites in the field hurts the sport. Do you agree with that or does the rotation of names keep it fresh? Would going to a system like NASCAR's that guarantees, say the top 10 in points a spot in the race, be beneficial? Would it be easier to sell sponsorship knowing that Robert Height (for example) will definitely be running Sunday. Also would it help drivers in the top 10 keep a ride? Example: At the beginning of the season J.R. Todd would be guaranteed a spot in the field but Shawn Langdon wouldn't so Todd keeps his ride... Not that there's anything wrong with Sean, but Todd's an established name with a following and established rivalries so he's more interesting to the fans.
Honestly I kind of like that you have to race into the field every week but I've also been irked when I've gone to a race and my favorite Funny Car driver doesn't make the field (Robert in Bristol.... crushing!)

 

[Bazzil]

I agree with those saying the likes of Bazemore leaving the sport hasn't helped. Every time he used to open his mouth people would be having a ***** about it, but the guy was interesting. He brought something different to the table and he elicited emotion from the viewers. Guys like him are a hell of a lot better to watch than a whole bunch of Mr. Robotos spewing out sponsor names in the same monotone way every week.

 

[Tim5636sc]

Tim, in your opinion do you think that the replays help make it easier to sell sponsorship? I remember reading that one of the ways used to place value on sponsorship is to take the total amount of time a company's logo gets on TV then compare that time to the equivalent amount of time to buy a commercial spot on that network. Do the replays help pad those numbers by extending the time a sponsor's name is exposed?

Total on air time is a VERY BROAD DEFINATION. Great point. What does anybody who invests in a product want? VALUE! I use the same formula in my presentations and it shows a very solid percentage Return on Investment. But not a one to one ratio. As a marketing guy, i would argue the total on air time is advertising $ in the bank. But in a dedicated ad, the company can Sell the product any way they want it. On the side of a wall or car, consumers have to decide whether they would like to purchase that product based on multiple parameters.

What sells it to potential sponsors is...how does this product placement x amount of viewers x the time on camera = what they decide a good ROI is.
Many people try to tell potential sponsors what a good ROI is for their target. Pretty arrogant in my humble opinion. Perhaps asking them what percentage is good for them and taylor a package which fits this parameter is a better way?
But yes sir, all the additional air time does help the 'NUMBERS'...and numbers is what matters, not the 'quality of the show'. However if the quality of the show is poor, usually the numbers decrease.
Its a delicate situation
David. But yes i use a simular formula but do NOT rely on just those numbers sir.
Great question.

 

[Tim5636sc]

In regards to the point about an open field instead of favorites, i answer like the infamous top end question, 'you do not have lane choice is it going to matter?'
if you are one of the favorites- Force dixon shoe- it does matter. You have the dominate car crew and usually adapt better than most. It also means your going to get more air time because most people love a winner.
Try being the other guy. 'BOTH LANES ARE EQUIL'
i think parody in drag racing provides unpredictable entertainment. Makes people want to see the upset. We need the field to tighten up a bit more for the show to improve but the network needs to sell those upset alerts harder. Last time i checked, cinderella was still attractive...take her to the dance.

 

[vegasnitro]

Jon

The money paid to ESPN is NOT a rumor.

You can confirm that information as a line item in the yearly NHRA Federal tax return published every Fall in the pages of Drag Racing Online, apparently that is where Chris found the info, too.

The fee paid to ESPN by NHRA has ranged between $8 Million and $10 Million per year.

See ya

Darr

You are correct Darr, DRO's yearly coverage of the NHRA tax return is where I got my info for the fee paid to ESPN2. Maybe I should have credited you guys in my post to make it more clear, I just assumed it was common knowledge since you guys have been putting it out there year over year.

Jon Asher, thanks for dropping in and responding to an issue that I know is near and dear to your heart. Good post and we would like to see more of ya round these parts when you get the time.

As for the folks who say that TV can't reproduce what it's like to be at the track, you are 1 million percent correct. But 1 hand washes the other, if we make the TV package better, more people will want to come to the track, and if more people come to the track, more people will want to watch on TV. Vicious cycle. I am of the opinion that even if we are successful getting more people to the track, the present TV package does not do enough to keep and hold those folks attention to our sport ...

Lastly, in no way do I support some type of provisional system that may help keep guys like Doug Herbert or JR Todd in the sport. The way to keep stars in the sport is to lower the costs of racing. Bruton Smith has already let it slip that there will be second event at Concord next year, how do you think the team owners feel about a 25th event that they now have to budget for? I would like to see where NHRA is going with the "spec" stuff, I would like to see the scheduling be more geographically correct instead of criss-crossing the country willy nilly, and I would not be opposed to a reduction in the number of events ... 20 seems like about the right number to me ... until such time that sponsorships and car counts dictate more races.

 

[NYNitro86]

Re: NHRA TV Ratings

Good call. I agree that 3 hours is rediculous. The only way I could wach 3 hours is if it were a live feed. I can't stand 3 hours where 2 hours is fluff. I always enjoyed when after NHRA today on TNN they would book an hour slot and have LIVE qualifying. Of course every time they did that the first car would oil down and that would be it.

Wish they could sell their video (once broadcast) to the SPEED network, run the entire raw video footage (startups, burnouts, backups, staging, runs, turnout & interviews - for all cars, even "filler cars") eliminate commentary except for track announcer and track interviews- run them at the midnight hour on the middle of the week (Most people have DVR's and VCR's). I guess that wouldnt help ratings as I would stop watching the ESPN shows if they would do that.

Agreed, Rather hear Bob in the booth and Alan at the top end and even seeing the graphics from AC Delco Vision like of the drviers who are racing,

 

[NYNitro86]

And get the guy from Main Event Videos to head up cinematography

Dean Pappadeas would do a better job with the swoopy cam because he Originated it and NHRA Stole it all from him back in the Diamond P days.

But ESPN should just make it ESPN 360 Exclusive. I remember last year it was live on 360 and it was good because everything was shown (even the Sportsman guys). It wasn't the broadcast on TV at the same time on the PC except Ads for ESPN, Capital One and ESPN360 with Billy Mays "The Secret is in the internet connection..." Or NHRA should go their own way and do live video of all three days for NHRA members and make the 3 day audios for free for everyone.

 

[NYNitro86]

Re: NHRA TV Ratings

Why not see every burnout and every force story there is to be heard. That is what i keep reading and seeing is. That is the new demographic they are marketing too. The new fans don't know the difference and those that do are basically told if you don't like it then screw you.

First it was Diamond P era with the same cheesy canned cheering after almost every run and now ESPN is all about the Storylines like WWE, it's all about you are supposed to care about the drivers Paul Page cares about. It's pathetic, the only reason why I watch it is because once again, it's because of Lewis Bloom. and if ever NHRA gets cutesy and creates a phrase like "Boogity Boogity Boogity" then I'll never watch it. Beside's I like when Matthew Brammer says "Holy Cow!" everytime a great run occurs in Pro Mod and I got my share @ E-Town last weekend with many 5 sec runs and record runs,
funny the only world record was Mike Castellana's 5.942 besting Rickie Smiths 5.951 from Saturday which bested Jim Halsey's 5.958 from the Shakedown back in October, the NHRA Pro Mod National Records were set but Raceway Park should put a footnote seperating NHRA Pro Mod from Pro Extreme (Blown Pro Mods (Roots and Screw Blowers), Turbo cars and A/Fuel Doorslammers) because Scott Cannon Jr's 5.738/252.71 are the records there. and unless you're Personnett, that speed mark is not quite reachable.

 

[jpee]

In regards to the point about an open field instead of favorites, i answer like the infamous top end question, 'you do not have lane choice is it going to matter?'
.

What would happen if NHRA gave the SLOWER CAR LANE CHOICE sort of to = the playing field.. ? In round 1 they would run according to qualifying.. 1 vs 16 ,,2 vs 15 etc.. but in round 2 instead of giving lane choice to the faster car the slower car gets lane choice?

We know everyone will still be running all out.. but IF there is a lane difference it will give the slower car a chance....

I imagine this would lead to "Shots Fired" in the pits or tower

 

[Jim]

Re: Ratings down - work on the demographics!

Unless and until NHRA (and, yes, us enthusiasts) do something about the ageing demographics of the sport, ratings (and Corporate sponsorship interest) is going to continue to go the wrong way.

We've got to get younger people interested-in and addicted-to our sport.
We're not keeping the pipeline filled. We weren't keeping the pipeline filled during better economic times either.

It would be neat if NHRA could develop a grass-roots oriented outreach program - a "bring a young person to the race" deal. Promote it to High Schools (Shop Classes would seem to be a natural target) and also encourage current fans (with a qualified discount deal) to bring a young person or two to Friday Qualifying.

People have to see our sport up-close-and-personal in order to fall in love with it.

If you don't think a fueler could "blow-the-doors-off any bogus "Extreme Sport", then, you've never been to an NHRA Pro event.

BTW: I'm not advocating "Ricer Racing" but, I think, if we get younger people out to a Pro Race, we've got a good chance of hooking-'em.

 

[PJ]

Jon, I have to disagree. Ratings from pre c-down years to now have dropped. It is the only reason? of course not. There are obviously many contributing factors. However just loking at this thread there are a number of people that have mentioned it as ONE of the reasons they do not watch as much.

With an issue like this there is no one cause but a buildup of many issues

______________________________________________________________


I agrre with others who have said more spunk is needed. I like hearing the interviews but for the most part they are the same. We need Whit or Scelzi or ME People not afraid to have fun, entertain the fans and yeah sure maybe rock the boat every so often.

 

[Paul]

Jon, I have to disagree. Ratings from pre c-down years to now have dropped. It is the only reason? of course not. There are obviously many contributing factors. However just loking at this thread there are a number of people that have mentioned it as ONE of the reasons they do not watch as much.

With an issue like this there is no one cause but a buildup of many issues

______________________________________________________________

How is that that petition working out for you? I see it is still stuck around the 1600 number it has been at for at least a year. It has been mentioned many times over the past 2 years, what the majority opinion here is not a true indication of what the majority of the NHRA fan base has to say since this is a very small sample size. As Jon said, it is time to find a new horse to get on because the "Countdown" horse has broke a leg and is taking a bullet in the head as we speak. Sorry PJ, I couldn't resist, it has been awhile since I broke your stones over this.

 

[vegasnitro]

Re: Ratings down - work on the demographics!

Unless and until NHRA (and, yes, us enthusiasts) do something about the ageing demographics of the sport, ratings (and Corporate sponsorship interest) is going to continue to go the wrong way.

I completely agree with this point ... I am 35 and when I go to a drag race I feel like the youngest guy there. Good for my self esteem ... bad for the future of the sport.

I think everyone would love to know how to get the younger crowd involved ... the professional import drag racing thing is OVER. Most of them took their toys and started drifting ... and now the drifting thing is dying down. I am convinced there is talent and serious gear heads in that realm ... but how can we get them to stop fad-hopping and come play in our arena? One idea I floated a long time ago and got poo-poo'd all over for was a revision of Pro Stock. No one under 50 cares about 500 cubic inches with carbuerators generally or the current GM and Chrysler cars specifically. Pro Stock needs to go back to being a logical extension of stock cars. Flat hoods, EFI, stock displacement (maybe even real stock blocks and cranks) ... 4, 6 or 8 cylinders ... FWD or RWD as long as they are a stock configuration ... maybe even allow an AWD car play in the sandbox ... more cylinders mean more weight ... same for power adders. I wouldn't mind seeing a FWD 6 cylinder Camry line up against a RWD 8 cylinder Mustang or a real Cobalt SS (FWD 4 cylinder with a power adder) or an AWD Subaru WRX. It gets WAY more manufacturers involved and way more tuners involved. And all of that could lead to the point of this thread ... which is higher TV ratings (with a much better demographic).

 

[Toejam]

Re: Ratings down - work on the demographics!

Unless and until NHRA (and, yes, us enthusiasts) do something about the ageing demographics of the sport, ratings (and Corporate sponsorship interest) is going to continue to go the wrong way.

We've got to get younger people interested-in and addicted-to our sport.
We're not keeping the pipeline filled. We weren't keeping the pipeline filled during better economic times either.

It would be neat if NHRA could develop a grass-roots oriented outreach program - a "bring a young person to the race" deal. Promote it to High Schools (Shop Classes would seem to be a natural target) and also encourage current fans (with a qualified discount deal) to bring a young person or two to Friday Qualifying.

People have to see our sport up-close-and-personal in order to fall in love with it.

If you don't think a fueler could "blow-the-doors-off any bogus "Extreme Sport", then, you've never been to an NHRA Pro event.

BTW: I'm not advocating "Ricer Racing" but, I think, if we get younger people out to a Pro Race, we've got a good chance of hooking-'em.

I agree Jim, but how many 18-24 year olds are going to fork out $50-60 for a day at the track? I doubt very few do anyway. NHRA has simply made this sport to expensive for younger adults and families!

A Promotion with local High schools would be a great idea! Maybe pass out $10 off Vouchers to local Auto shop teachers at area High schools.