Indycar News & Rumors.

[D.R.T.]

I agree that its important for promoters. No question.

However, any sport will take improved TV ratings over attendance figures any day of the week.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

I agree that its important for promoters. No question.

However, any sport will take improved TV ratings over attendance figures any day of the week.

I don't know about that. Would Roman Abramovich prefer a bigger slice of Sky Sports TV revenue to fewer fans turning up to Stamford Bridge? Only he can answer that but somehow I doubt it. However prestigious a club Chelsea are, I don't think empty seats would look too good.

If increased TV ratings meant more revenue for race promoters that would be fine but they are heavily reliant on spectators coming through the gates for that income and whatever sponsors money they get. If the attendance starts to drop off, that's not good from the sponsor's point of view, not good for the promoter and ultimately not good for a series if it loses a track.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I don't know about that. Would Roman Abramovich prefer a bigger slice of Sky Sports TV revenue to fewer fans turning up to Stamford Bridge? Only he can answer that but somehow I doubt it. However prestigious a club Chelsea are, I don't think empty seats would look too good.

If increased TV ratings meant more revenue for race promoters that would be fine but they are heavily reliant on spectators coming through the gates for that income and whatever sponsors money they get. If the attendance starts to drop off, that's not good from the sponsor's point of view, not good for the promoter and ultimately not good for a series if it loses a track.

Sponsors and Indycar get more financial value from TV and TV audiences than event attendances.

That doesn't mean attendances aren't to be ignored but it's definitely 2nd priority when it comes to pro sport

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

Sponsors and Indycar get more financial value from TV and TV audiences than event attendances.

That doesn't mean attendances aren't to be ignored but it's definitely 2nd priority when it comes to pro sport

Event attendances are important, otherwise how else does a sports venue make any money and host future events?

Take the Nurburgring for example. The new owners considered F1's sanctioning fees unrealistic, hence no German GP this year but they promoted last weekend's WEC round. Some 62,000 spectators, 40,000 of those on race day, passed through the gates to see Porsche beat Audi.

The race day attendance was two-thirds compared to last time the German GP was held there in 2013 but in return the promoters paid the WEC 20% of F1's sanctioning fee. TV coverage of the six-hour race was a fraction of F1's but given that the race promoters don't get any TV income, from either F1 or the WEC, who are they to care what the TV ratings are?

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Event attendances are important, otherwise how else does a sports venue make any money and host future events?

Take the Nurburgring for example. The new owners considered F1's sanctioning fees unrealistic, hence no German GP this year but they promoted last weekend's WEC round. Some 62,000 spectators, 40,000 of those on race day, passed through the gates to see Porsche beat Audi.

The race day attendance was two-thirds compared to last time the German GP was held there in 2013 but in return the promoters paid the WEC 20% of F1's sanctioning fee. TV coverage of the six-hour race was a fraction of F1's but given that the race promoters don't get any TV income, from either F1 or the WEC, who are they to care what the TV ratings are?

Interesting, where did you find this info?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

Interesting, where did you find this info?

Autosport. It's an article titled ''What's happening to European F1 crowds?'', written by Dieter Rencken but you'll need a subscription to read the whole article; here's the link.

http://plus.autosport.com/premium/fe...427.1436467583

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

TV coverage of the six-hour race was a fraction of F1's but given that the race promoters don't get any TV income, from either F1 or the WEC, who are they to care what the TV ratings are?

So are looking at this through the promoter's perspective only. Taking a look through Indycar's perspective - Tv is the priority out of the 2.

There is a balance between the two perspectives - no doubt. But TV wins as a revenue raiser.

If you look at NASCAR - venues even get a cut of the annual tv money

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Autosport. It's an article titled ''What's happening to European F1 crowds?'', written by Dieter Rencken but you'll need a subscription to read the whole article; here's the link.

http://plus.autosport.com/premium/fe...427.1436467583

Thx but I don't have a subscription. Maybe you can quote the relevant part?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

Thx but I don't have a subscription. Maybe you can quote the relevant part?

If it's any help I paraphrased and posted what I thought was relevant the relevant as far as race promoters is concerned.

[Coach Ep]

ok.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

So are looking at this through the promoter's perspective only. Taking a look through Indycar's perspective - Tv is the priority out of the 2.

There is a balance between the two perspectives - no doubt. But TV wins as a revenue raiser.

If you look at NASCAR - venues even get a cut of the annual tv money

This has nothing to with perspective, this is about making money, which every sport needs to do in order to thrive. Crowd attendance, sponsors and TV ratings aren't mutually exclusive and any sport is dependent on all three. Poor TV ratings, poor crowd attendance and lack of sponsorship aren't indicative of a thriving sport and ever since the IRL came into existence it has suffered from all three so it's good to see the TV ratings are up. As for crowd attendance, this has a direct impact on a tracks profitability.

Take Edmonton for example. The reason it dropped off the calendar, after 8 years, was to quote Lorna Rosen, the chief financial officer for the City of Edmonton: "due to poor attendance and lukewarm response from the corporate community". In other words sponsors weren't interested because of low crowd attendance.

You should read this article.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...165/story.html

It will give you a better understanding of what race promotion is about.

NASCAR tracks do get TV revenue but the vast majority of IndyCar races aren't held on NASCAR tracks.

[NaBUru38]

Nascar gets plenty of money from television, therefore they can pay race promoters.

IndyCar used to pay to air on ESPN.

[TheMightyM]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

NASCAR tracks do get TV revenue but the vast majority of IndyCar races aren't held on NASCAR tracks.

Vast majority not on NASCAR tracks? No. Half of IndyCar races are held of circuits that also host NASCAR races (Sprint Cup or Xfinity Series).

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Nascar gets plenty of money from television, therefore they can pay race promoters.

IndyCar used to pay to air on ESPN.

I would have thought the NASCAR track owners, like ISC and SMI, the two biggest, did the promoting themselves?

In its last season in 2003, CART paid CBS for air time and production costs and gave broadcasts free to Speed Channel.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by TheMightyM

Vast majority not on NASCAR tracks? No. Half of IndyCar races are held of circuits that also host NASCAR races (Sprint Cup or Xfinity Series).

Looking at both this year's NASCAR Sprint Cup schedule and IndyCar season, IMS, TMS, Fontana, Pocono and Sonoma held races in both series, though I may have missed a venue out. That's 5 rounds out of IndyCar's 16 round schedule.

[TheMightyM]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Looking at both this year's NASCAR Sprint Cup schedule and IndyCar season, IMS, TMS, Fontana, Pocono and Sonoma held races in both series, though I may have missed a venue out. That's 5 rounds out of IndyCar's 16 round schedule.

Iowa and Mid-Ohio are on the Xfinity Series schedule. So seven of 14 tracks (counting both IMS configurations as one track).

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by TheMightyM

Iowa and Mid-Ohio are on the Xfinity Series schedule. So seven of 14 tracks (counting both IMS configurations as one track).

I didn't see the Xfinity Series schedule but then I don't follow NASCAR. It's 7 if you take NASCAR as one series and don't differentiate between the Sprint Cup, Xfinity and Camping World series but I've always regarded NASCAR as the sanctioning body with the three series as quite separate from each other.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

This has nothing to with perspective, this is about making money, which every sport needs to do in order to thrive. Crowd attendance, sponsors and TV ratings aren't mutually exclusive and any sport is dependent on all three. Poor TV ratings, poor crowd attendance and lack of sponsorship aren't indicative of a thriving sport and ever since the IRL came into existence it has suffered from all three so it's good to see the TV ratings are up. As for crowd attendance, this has a direct impact on a tracks profitability.

Take Edmonton for example. The reason it dropped off the calendar, after 8 years, was to quote Lorna Rosen, the chief financial officer for the City of Edmonton: "due to poor attendance and lukewarm response from the corporate community". In other words sponsors weren't interested because of low crowd attendance.

You should read this article.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...165/story.html

It will give you a better understanding of what race promotion is about.

NASCAR tracks do get TV revenue but the vast majority of IndyCar races aren't held on NASCAR tracks.

So once again - you are only looking through the eyes of an individual race promoter.

When champcar had bigger crowds at St Pete and Long Beach than they had watching on television - how did that work out for the series as a whole?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

So once again - you are only looking through the eyes of an individual race promoter.

You clearly didn't read my post correctly. I said: "Crowd attendance, sponsors and TV ratings aren't mutually exclusive", so I don't see how I can be only looking through the eyes of an individual race promoter?

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

When champcar had bigger crowds at St Pete and Long Beach than they had watching on television - how did that work out for the series as a whole?

CART only raced once at St. Pete's in 2003 and Long Beach had been a perennial since 1984. Both though, were obviously successful enough as CART/Champ Car events, particularly as crowd pullers, that they were added to the IndyCar series calendar by the IRL.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

CART only raced once at St. Pete's in 2003 and Long Beach had been a perennial since 1984. Both though, were obviously successful enough as CART/Champ Car events, particularly as crowd pullers, that they were added to the IndyCar series calendar.

Yes as events they were successful crowd pullers. However my question is that when crowds at the events exceed those watching the same race on TV - how did that work out for champ car?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

Yes as events they were successful crowd pullers. However my question is that when crowds at the events exceed those watching the same race on TV - how did that work out for champ car?

CART only had the one race at St. Pete in 2003, as it was cancelled the following year, so we will never really know how well it would have worked out for Champ Car in the long run. However, considering how popular it was in 2003 and has been ever since on the IRL's calendar, I think it's safe to say it would have continued to work out well.

Long Beach speaks for itself. As a Champ Car event, it was pretty much the jewel in the crown on the calendar, so much so it was the opening and only round of the 2008 season before Champ Car and the IRL merged that year.

[D.R.T.]

I guess my point is - those strong individual events in terms of crowds contributed very little to the overall health of Champcar.

The biggest barrier or area of impact for Champcar was the lack of television ratings.

Crowds at Long Beach exceeded those who were watching on TV.

This was no good for Champcar and despite strong events the series didnt have a strong enough following beyond the individual events.

This is why television is more important to a racing series more than crowds

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

I guess my point is - those strong individual events in terms of crowds contributed very little to the overall health of Champcar.

The biggest barrier or area of impact for Champcar was the lack of television ratings.

Crowds at Long Beach exceeded those who were watching on TV.

This was no good for Champcar and despite strong events the series didnt have a strong enough following beyond the individual events.

This is why television is more important to a racing series more than crowds

Most motorsports fans know that by 2003, CART was in decline and TV ratings and crowd attendance had started falling off before CART morphed into Champ Car. Having said that, the IRL has never enjoyed the TV ratings or crowds CART did.

For a sport to thrive it needs both good crowd attendance and TV ratings and that was not happening at the time for either Champ Car or the IRL, which was one reason for the merger of the two series.

Apart from Long Beach and Toronto, I can't think of any other Champ Car race tracks that joined the newly merged series and are still on the calendar now. Cleveland, Road America and Portland, venues that had been around for years, were no longer part of the show. I think that was a clear indication of the promoters and track owners lack of faith in AOWR. However, next year will see the return of Road America to AOWR, for the first time since 2007.

[D.R.T.]

Soooooooooo in summary - event fans do not support the long term health of a racing series.

Television though is a major contributor this and hence why the positive increase of tv ratings in 2015 is priority to Indycar.

[NaBUru38]

CART / Champ Car races scheduled in 2016:

o- Long Beach: 1984–2008
o- Toronto: 1986–2007
o- Road America: 1982–2007
o- Mid-Ohio: 1983–2003
o- St. Petersburg: 2003
o- Detroit: 1989–2001
o- Indianapolis: 1983–1995

CART / Champ Car races rumoured in 2016:

o- Mexico City: 1980–1981, 2002–2007
o- Milwaukee: 1980–2006
o- Phoenix: 1979–1995
o- Pocono: 1980–1989