Commercial breakdown for the Sony HD 500 race:

BobbyFord

BobbyFord

Secret Agent Man
Contributor
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
73,374
Points
1,033
Location
Southern California.
... from cawsnjaws.com:
Total number of commercials: 151
Total number of companies or entities advertised: 81
Start time to record race/commercial periods: 7:54pm/et
End time to record race/commercial periods: 11:58pm/et
Total minutes: 244
Minutes of race broadcast: 171
Minutes of commercials: 73
(see full article at CawsnJaws.com), so that is about 12 minutes of commercials in 30minutes, regular TV shows do about 10 minutes of commercials. NOTE: no complaints to Jayski: send them to NBC, see my media contact page for ways to contact NBC for praise or complaints.(9-5-2006)


Nice <_<
 
BobbyFord said:
... from cawsnjaws.com:
Total number of commercials: 151
Total number of companies or entities advertised: 81
Start time to record race/commercial periods: 7:54pm/et
End time to record race/commercial periods: 11:58pm/et
Total minutes: 244
Minutes of race broadcast: 171
Minutes of commercials: 73
(see full article at CawsnJaws.com), so that is about 12 minutes of commercials in 30minutes, regular TV shows do about 10 minutes of commercials. NOTE: no complaints to Jayski: send them to NBC, see my media contact page for ways to contact NBC for praise or complaints.(9-5-2006)


Nice <_<
Click to expand...

I think whoever does his math really needs to go back to school and relearn math.

That actually figures out to be approx. 18 mins. per hour. :rolleyes: Which really makes quite a difference with what they're trying to project.
244 min. is 4 hrs. 4 min. 73 divided by 4 is 18.25

They are correct though, I've done quite a lot of taping different shows (approx. 60), pausing for commercials and the average is 20 mins of commercials per hour.
I've also taped a lot of the races, (NCTS, Busch, Cup, Hooters, ARCA & NHRA) and the average is .............yup you guessed it, 20 mins. per hour.

What really surprised me was going back to some of my old races from the mid 80's & early 90's that I had just set the record and let run. When I fast forwarded through the commercials, I found there was 20-21 mins. per hour of commercials.
Now considering the cost of the TV deal starting in 2001, and how little ABC/ESPN was paying back then one would think there would have to be considerably more commercials to pay for it, but that really isn't necessary because the cost of the commercial slots have increased tremendously, NOT the amount of commercials.
Way back in the 50's when I was in 6th grade we had an assignment to find out how much time was commercials verses programming. (funny huh? LOL) At that time it was 15 min. per hour show, or 10 min for a 30 min show.
Here we are 50 years later, and it has changed very little, so I for the life of me can not understand all the complaining about the commercials during a race.It just seems worse I would guess because there isn't really an opportune time for a commercial during a race.

You don't believe these #'s you can very easily do your own research and check out various shows, just do it honestly. :)
 
I generally tape the races when they're on FOX and can finish watching a Busch race in 45 minutes green-to-checkerd fast forwarding through commercials. I can watch a 500-mile Nextel race in under an hour and a half.

It takes longer on NBC though, because they do cut out of commercials and they do cut breaks short.

The Daytona race on FOX and Indianapolis on NBC just pissed me off.
 
how long till the cost of a superbowl commercial and the cost of an indy or daytona (or even homestead) commercial equal out?
 
Eagle1 said:
They are correct though, I've done quite a lot of taping different shows (approx. 60), pausing for commercials and the average is 20 mins of commercials per hour.
I've also taped a lot of the races, (NCTS, Busch, Cup, Hooters, ARCA & NHRA) and the average is .............yup you guessed it, 20 mins. per hour.

What really surprised me was going back to some of my old races from the mid 80's & early 90's that I had just set the record and let run. When I fast forwarded through the commercials, I found there was 20-21 mins. per hour of commercials.
Click to expand...

Interesting stats. I guess the whiners on some of the other boards will still try to dispute those facts. Good job on the numbers.
 
well to be honest, a few years ago I was one of the complainers, so I decided to prove how bad they were,
pilot.gif
I honestly tried m best to make them look terrible but as you can see it backfired on me. Being atleast semi intelligent I had to admit how wrong I was, and since then I've seen several others do this same type of test and it always comes out about the same.
Again to be honest when I started checking the old races it was to prove how much worse the ads were today, than "back in the day".
pilot.gif
 
I understand why we complain, but let's face it COMMERCIALS PAY FOR OUR FREE TELECASTS.
 
kat2220 said:
I understand why we complain, but let's face it COMMERCIALS PAY FOR OUR FREE TELECASTS.
Click to expand...


Depends on the definition of FREE.. TNT, speed and FX arn't really free:growl: Look how many have been on TNT, and the Next 2 are, for sure, are on TNT also
 
Bucky Badger said:
Depends on the definition of FREE.. TNT, speed and FX arn't really free:growl: Look how many have been on TNT, and the Next 2 are, for sure, are on TNT also
Click to expand...

Well put, for a while you had to pay for FX around here. We missed the Rockingham race in 2001 on FX because it wasn't offered as a part of the 36 channel cable package and we could not get digital cable in our area at the time (it was restricted to very small portions of the county). Richmond came along and we called Comcast about getting FX. They had recieved so many complaints from customers that they were not able to see the race because FX wasn't offered. They put it on the cable lineup that night but did not announce that it was on the cable lineup (via TV Guide, MD Independent or any other form of print) until mid-July the following year.

BTW ... Our Comcast provider doesn't offer NASCAR In-Car except for a few races. They're $79.99 per race, you can't pay for the full-year package. If NASCAR offered live commercial-free streaming video online, I'd pay for it. But I cannot and will not do the pay-per-view thing.

If the commercials get too bad, I'll flip on WFLS MRN Radio or Trackpass and listen in.

You also bring up a good point on TNT, however, TNT does offer HD. FX doesn't and half the FOX Sports Busch races aren't broadcast in HD. I've only seen TNT offer one race in analog, no-HD (ORP). SPEED was also the subject of alot too in 2001, they didn't offer that here either. Enough of us rednecks wanted to see our race though :D :beerbang:
 
Bucky Badger said:
Depends on the definition of FREE.. TNT, speed and FX arn't really free:growl: Look how many have been on TNT, and the Next 2 are, for sure, are on TNT also
Click to expand...

I've seen this argument used a lot, and it really makes me laugh because I really think it's VERY weak.
Bucky I'm not responding to you, or attacking you, it's this "not free argument" that IMHO is a real stretch. Technically you are correct you do pay for cable or satillite dish.
So using this type of premis;
#1 Show me ANYTIME in the history of television that it has been "FREE" for everyone.?

In order to recieve any programming one has always had to purchase an electronic device that would take the signals recieved and convert them so you could see them. The amount you spent/or spend depends on choices you make as to the bells and whistles included. As far as recieving the signal into your home so your box can convert them for you to see, in the early days it was rabbit ears, roof top antenna, roof top rotational antennas, cable, satillite etc. etc.. A person has to have one or more of these methods to get the programming into your home, the option is clearly yours depending on the amount of programming you choose.
Do you honestly have all this equipment to only watch 1 channel? I doubt it. With this you get to recieve network TV, movies, sports, comedy, etc. etc.
The point is the networks and advertisers pay for the production and distribution of these shows so they can be sent out to your home for free.

Personally I have DirecTV and TNT, FX, ESPN, SPEED etc. are all included in the basic package, and that is all I pay for. I do not only watch racing on TNT or FX I watch the other programing and movies on them to.
IMO if you had to purchase special "Racing packages" like you do for football or baseball, or special channel just for NASCAR racing only it would make more sense but we have it made, I know it and most everyone knows it. :)
 
Eagle1 said:
well to be honest, a few years ago I was one of the complainers, so I decided to prove how bad they were,
pilot.gif
I honestly tried m best to make them look terrible but as you can see it backfired on me. Being atleast semi intelligent I had to admit how wrong I was, and since then I've seen several others do this same type of test and it always comes out about the same.
Again to be honest when I started checking the old races it was to prove how much worse the ads were today, than "back in the day".
pilot.gif
Click to expand...

It's good to know you can admit when you're wrong, unlike many of the other complainers.
 
AndyMarquisLIVE said:
You also bring up a good point on TNT, however, TNT does offer HD. FX doesn't and half the FOX Sports Busch races aren't broadcast in HD. I've only seen TNT offer one race in analog, no-HD (ORP). SPEED was also the subject of alot too in 2001, they didn't offer that here either. Enough of us rednecks wanted to see our race though :D :beerbang:
Click to expand...

FX and Speed do some HD broadcasting, but you have to live in New York or have one of those large satellite dishes in order to get it. The reason I know this is I have seen HD highlights on ESPN SportsCenter. I do hate it when races are piped over to FX because they can't be seen in HD by most people. To Fox's credit, they allowed their affiliates to carry the Monday races when it was rained out on Sunday. That allowed for HD broadcasting, which I truly appreciated when watching after working on my DVR.
 
Eagle1 said:
I've seen this argument used a lot, and it really makes me laugh because I really think it's VERY weak.
Bucky I'm not responding to you, or attacking you, it's this "not free argument" that IMHO is a real stretch. Technically you are correct you do pay for cable or satillite dish.
So using this type of premis;
#1 Show me ANYTIME in the history of television that it has been "FREE" for everyone.?

In order to recieve any programming one has always had to purchase an electronic device that would take the signals recieved and convert them so you could see them. The amount you spent/or spend depends on choices you make as to the bells and whistles included. As far as recieving the signal into your home so your box can convert them for you to see, in the early days it was rabbit ears, roof top antenna, roof top rotational antennas, cable, satillite etc. etc.. A person has to have one or more of these methods to get the programming into your home, the option is clearly yours depending on the amount of programming you choose.
Do you honestly have all this equipment to only watch 1 channel? I doubt it. With this you get to recieve network TV, movies, sports, comedy, etc. etc.
The point is the networks and advertisers pay for the production and distribution of these shows so they can be sent out to your home for free.

Personally I have DirecTV and TNT, FX, ESPN, SPEED etc. are all included in the basic package, and that is all I pay for. I do not only watch racing on TNT or FX I watch the other programing and movies on them to.
IMO if you had to purchase special "Racing packages" like you do for football or baseball, or special channel just for NASCAR racing only it would make more sense but we have it made, I know it and most everyone knows it. :)
Click to expand...

I see your point also.... but an antenna doesn't cost 60-80 bucks a month:growl:
 
MRM said:
FX and Speed do some HD broadcasting, but you have to live in New York or have one of those large satellite dishes in order to get it. The reason I know this is I have seen HD highlights on ESPN SportsCenter. I do hate it when races are piped over to FX because they can't be seen in HD by most people. To Fox's credit, they allowed their affiliates to carry the Monday races when it was rained out on Sunday. That allowed for HD broadcasting, which I truly appreciated when watching after working on my DVR.
Click to expand...

My FOX affiliatte (DC) said after Talladega was rained out that they would have live coverage of the race.... Didn't happen. Anytime it's rained out, the race is shoved over to FX.

I'd rather have the races on TNT than NBC myself, however, only because I don't get NBC where I live unless I pull out bunny ears and can pick up Baltimore's station. We can get NBC HD on the HD TV set but my little sister watches it CONSTANTLY just to listen to crap (I mean rap) music. Anyways, my Comcast Digital Cable box doesn't work and NBC doesn't come in on basic cable anymore so I perfer it to be on TNT.
 
Eagle1 said:
I've seen this argument used a lot, and it really makes me laugh because I really think it's VERY weak.
Bucky I'm not responding to you, or attacking you, it's this "not free argument" that IMHO is a real stretch. Technically you are correct you do pay for cable or satillite dish.
So using this type of premis;
#1 Show me ANYTIME in the history of television that it has been "FREE" for everyone.?

In order to recieve any programming one has always had to purchase an electronic device that would take the signals recieved and convert them so you could see them. The amount you spent/or spend depends on choices you make as to the bells and whistles included. As far as recieving the signal into your home so your box can convert them for you to see, in the early days it was rabbit ears, roof top antenna, roof top rotational antennas, cable, satillite etc. etc.. A person has to have one or more of these methods to get the programming into your home, the option is clearly yours depending on the amount of programming you choose.
Do you honestly have all this equipment to only watch 1 channel? I doubt it. With this you get to recieve network TV, movies, sports, comedy, etc. etc.
The point is the networks and advertisers pay for the production and distribution of these shows so they can be sent out to your home for free.

Personally I have DirecTV and TNT, FX, ESPN, SPEED etc. are all included in the basic package, and that is all I pay for. I do not only watch racing on TNT or FX I watch the other programing and movies on them to.
IMO if you had to purchase special "Racing packages" like you do for football or baseball, or special channel just for NASCAR racing only it would make more sense but we have it made, I know it and most everyone knows it. :)
Click to expand...

I agree in part. I'm a huge sports fan in general and like to watch NYY baseball. They don't air the Yankees here and recently, DirecTV acquired exclusive rights to the network that carried the Washington Nationals games. Since we have hurricanes and blizzards, I won't get a dish.

I'd like a few channels added to the EVEN the digital lineup: BBC World News, NFL Network. More than 30% of the basic cable channels are spanish networks and most of the OTA networks are spanish language. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

I want BBC, **** even on a digital cable package, because I HATE the American news media with a passion. All they talk about on CNN, MSNBC, FOX and CBS is celebirty news and crime **** - nothing on terrorism or stuff that's important. Think I got information from any television or radio station during the hurricane last week? Hell no, Tom Cruise was far more important :mad: :mad:
 
Bucky Badger said:
I see your point also.... but an antenna doesn't cost 60-80 bucks a month:growl:
Click to expand...

And neither does my Total Plue DirecTV package, I pay $45.00 per month which includes Local channels and My TiVo.

So you're trying to tell me the ONLY reason you have a TV and get cable is because of NASCAR? You won't get to offended if I don't buy that 100% will you? LOL

OKay lets put it this way, not once reading these threads have I seen anyone complaining about the commercialization of all the other channels and programming. Where is that rage? It's been documented both here and other sites on the net that the rate of commercials per programming hour is the same. Why is it that the very same arguments used against NASCAR programming, having to pay for cable etc. etc. aren't being spouted?

The point that has been made is that no matter what you watch on TV you will get the same amount of commercials,. The amount of commercials that have increased ove the past 50 years is very small, especially if you consider the techniclogical advances made and quality of programs. :einstein:
 
One of the most reasons people are upset with the commercials is that unlike the NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA or the college sports is that all of those sports have down time when commercials can be shown without missing any of the action. Racing and Australian Rules Football, don't have any down time in which those commercials can be shown without missing any of the action. Programs scripted for television also have breaks built into them. Another place where people have actually griped about commercials are during not made for TV movies. TBS will usually show about the first 30 minutes without an ad, but after that, they will make up for that time during the rest of the two hours. Nothing is so agrevating as that, but as it's been said before, those ads are what pay for the programming.

Also, as for MRN/PRN, even if you want to listen to that over the internet, you're still going to have the down time for the commercials. Only with a direct feed from the network will you not have the commercial times.
 
if you guys want to argue costs..

$300 electric bill
$100 water bill
$45 internet bill
$?? 2 cell phones, lots and lots of minuites
$?? 2 land lines
$40 (every 2 weeks) gas for my truck @ 10 MPG
$100 (every week) gas for my dad's truck, 2 fill ups a week if not more @20 MPG
$50 (every week) gas for my mom's car
$?? direcTV satelite
 
kat2220 said:
BS! Yes. We pay for cable, digital, with more than 800 channels included. It's a LOT cheaper than you think! Your dang phone costs more where I live!
Click to expand...

Digital cable here is around $60/month. How I can have 500+ channels and not get BBC News or CNNi is beyond me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom