IndyCar signs multiyear media rights package with NBC Sports Group

FLRacingFan

FLRacingFan

Team Owner
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
37,470
Points
1,033
Location
Florida
https://www.indycar.com/News/2018/03/03-21-INDYCAR-NBC-Sports-rights-deal

Eight races plus Indy 500 qualifying on NBC, all other races on NBCSN. All races streamed through NBC Sports Live Extra. NBC Sports Gold will have all practice and qualifying sessions not shown live, plus Indy Lights and other events. Hopefully they keep Carb Day on NBCSN but it doesn't sound like it here.

As part of this new alignment, the Indianapolis 500 will be included in NBC Sports’ “Championship Season” marketing campaign, which touts numerous high-profile championship events presented on NBC Sports platforms from May to July. Other events include horse racing’s Triple Crown, The PLAYERS, Premier League Championship Sunday, the French Open, the Stanley Cup Final, the Tour de France and The Open Championship. The entire Verizon IndyCar Series will receive unprecedented marketing and promotional support from NBC Sports, which will utilize not only its own assets but many NBCUniversal assets as well.
Click to expand...

Overall, a much better package.
 
Jenna Fryer reports it is a three-year deal: https://www.apnews.com/6b34a0b234ab...inks-3-year-media-rights-deal-with-NBC-Sports

StandOnIt said:
Good news for IndyCar. NBC Sports Gold another ransom attempt to squeeze more bucks out of the hard core IndyCar fan..and they call it Gold ..heh heh nice.
Click to expand...
They pissed off a bunch of soccer fans when they put a whole bunch of EPL games that used to be on Extra Time behind the Gold paywall. Something like $50 for the season for games that weren't good enough to air on NBC/NBCSN/CNBC/USA/whatever. Hopefully they learned from that and put up a more reasonable price if it's mostly just practice and qualifying.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Jenna Fryer reports it is a three-year deal: https://www.apnews.com/6b34a0b234ab...inks-3-year-media-rights-deal-with-NBC-Sports


They pissed off a bunch of soccer fans when they put a whole bunch of EPL games that used to be on Extra Time behind the Gold paywall. Something like $50 for the season for games that weren't good enough to air on NBC/NBCSN/CNBC/USA/whatever. Hopefully they learned from that and put up a more reasonable price if it's mostly just practice and qualifying.
Click to expand...

This is the future though. Why I'm not an advocate of subscription services. All the networks are eventually going to put their most desired content on subscription based streaming platforms, rendering cable TV obsolete.


The problem I have is the cost piles up. Imagine paying $9/month for CBS, $9/month for ESPN, $9/month for ABC, $20/month for IndyCar, $59/year for NASCAR, $13/month for Netflix, $10/month for F1, $20/month for MLB and so on... on top of your internet bill.

"A la carte" streaming will be bad for consumers in the future.
 
Don't think so. You are going to pay for cable in addition to the other. There is the example right in front of your face
 
I love the coverage NBC has for Notre Dame games and the Kentucky Derby I can't wait to see what they do for the 500
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
This is the future though. Why I'm not an advocate of subscription services. All the networks are eventually going to put their most desired content on subscription based streaming platforms, rendering cable TV obsolete.


The problem I have is the cost piles up. Imagine paying $9/month for CBS, $9/month for ESPN, $9/month for ABC, $20/month for IndyCar, $59/year for NASCAR, $13/month for Netflix, $10/month for F1, $20/month for MLB and so on... on top of your internet bill.

"A la carte" streaming will be bad for consumers in the future.
Click to expand...
'
Ah, but imagine the advantage to those of us who are stuck with cable bills for channels we don't watch. ESPN is the largest slice of a subscriber's bill, so I'm stuck paying for a block of networks I ignore. I don't care about USA, TNT, TBS, or most of the others I'm paying for either. I'd happily switch to an 'a la carte' model, since all I'd be paying for are NASCAR, Indy, CBS, golf and Turner Classic Movies. That covers about 90% of the household's current viewing habits. Maybe NBC, FOX, and / or ABC, depending on their rates.

It's entertainment, not food. There are alternatives, or I can get by without it.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
'
Ah, but imagine the advantage to those of us who are stuck with cable bills for channels we don't watch. ESPN is the largest slice of a subscriber's bill, so I'm stuck paying for a block of networks I ignore. I don't care about USA, TNT, TBS, or most of the others I'm paying for either. I'd happily switch to an 'a la carte' model, since all I'd be paying for are NASCAR, Indy, CBS, NBC, golf and Turner Classic Movies. That covers about 90% of the household's current viewing habits.
Click to expand...

The problem is that we're finding out "A La Carte" basically means paying $10 per channel, not less than $1 per channel like you would if that model existed with cable. The streaming deal is showing that the cable companies aren't the real evil here.

And I like having a bunch of other channels myself. If there's not something on one of the main channels I watch, I might find something else on one of those. See lots of reruns of old shows I used to watch growing up on some of those no-name networks that aren't available on Netflix, Hulu or CBS All Access.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
'
Ah, but imagine the advantage to those of us who are stuck with cable bills for channels we don't watch. ESPN is the largest slice of a subscriber's bill, so I'm stuck paying for a block of networks I ignore. I don't care about USA, TNT, TBS, or most of the others I'm paying for either. I'd happily switch to an 'a la carte' model, since all I'd be paying for are NASCAR, Indy, CBS, golf and Turner Classic Movies. That covers about 90% of the household's current viewing habits. Maybe NBC, FOX, and / or ABC, depending on their rates.
Click to expand...
that isn't going to happen, it hasn't happened in years and it could have, but the gatekeepers hold the cards and they will hold the new "gold's" in the future.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
This is the future though. Why I'm not an advocate of subscription services. All the networks are eventually going to put their most desired content on subscription based streaming platforms, rendering cable TV obsolete.


The problem I have is the cost piles up. Imagine paying $9/month for CBS, $9/month for ESPN, $9/month for ABC, $20/month for IndyCar, $59/year for NASCAR, $13/month for Netflix, $10/month for F1, $20/month for MLB and so on... on top of your internet bill.

"A la carte" streaming will be bad for consumers in the future.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's why I pay for very little of it, basically what I can't get on DirecTV.
 
StandOnIt said:
not watching either I don't know wtf you are talking about.
Click to expand...
NBC has generally done a very good job promoting horse racing, particularly the Triple Crown, since they got the rights to all three events. A good number of the most-watched horse races of the last three decades or so have come in the last five years on NBC.
 
A lot of good, but some negatives:
- Lights won't be on TV, which sucks, but i'm pretty sure you will be able to stream the races via nbcsports.com
- What about the IndyCar YT channel? Seems like content will not be put on there as often, I feel for the European fans
- Gold, I have not bought it before, will it be worth it? Guess I better prepare for the transition as I might need to buy the F1 and IndyCar passes to get an in depth look at things.
- Buying these packages add the **** up, lord have mercy.
 
I grew up with voices like Paul Page and Bob Jenkins Going to be weird not having it on ABC next year, when that's where it's always been my entire life
 
Kiante said:
A lot of good, but some negatives:
- Lights won't be on TV, which sucks, but i'm pretty sure you will be able to stream the races via nbcsports.com
- What about the IndyCar YT channel? Seems like content will not be put on there as often, I feel for the European fans
- Gold, I have not bought it before, will it be worth it? Guess I better prepare for the transition as I might need to buy the F1 and IndyCar passes to get an in depth look at things.
- Buying these packages add the **** up, lord have mercy.
Click to expand...
At the very least it sounds like Pro Mazda and USF2000 will still be on the series web sites and YouTube. Also, Indy Lights Twitter said about the announcement it'll be an "additional" way to watch their races so they may still be on YouTube and the official web site too. Honestly, I don't think Gold will be *that* expensive for the year. The EPL pass was $50 a season for something like 130 matches and this won't have anywhere near as much content.

Charlie Spencer said:
I wonder if there's any opportunity for Allen Bestwick to reappear.
Click to expand...
I hope he and NBC can finally reconcile because Rick Allen truly is really bad and I'm tired of Allen being wasted on early-/mid-round tennis matchups and 10:30 PM Eastern PAC-12 games on ESPN2.
 
FLRacingFan said:
I hope he and NBC can finally reconcile because Rick Allen truly is really bad and I'm tired of Allen being wasted on early-/mid-round tennis matchups and 10:30 PM Eastern PAC-12 games on ESPN2.
Click to expand...

I like Rick Allen, but Bestwick would be a major improvement.
 
Doc Austin said:
Apparently NBC is set to continue with it's current lineup, which is actually petty good.
Click to expand...

NBC's IndyCar coverage is, and has been for years, the best motorsports coverage on TV, hands down.

I remember when VS picked up IndyCar in 2009 and I thought it was the biggest joke. Then, I watched a race on VS and was blown away. After watching an IndyCar race on VS, watching a race on ABC, or watching NASCAR on Fox and TNT was like watching a cartoon.

I was at the Baltimore Grand Prix in 2011 and 2012 and, when I'd go home and watch the VS (2011) and NBCSN (2012) telecast, I was just amazed at how they captured the atmosphere and the racing.

Amazingly, NBC's only gotten better. Leigh Diffey is the best PxP announcer in the business right now. Townsend Bell and Paul Tracy are phenomenal in the booth. The pit road coverage is great. Everything about their coverage is smooth.
 
I wish both networks would have their NASCAR production teams watch Fox's IMSA and NBC's IndyCar coverage. The networks have demonstrated they're capable of putting on broadcasts with the emphasis on the racing and informative booth crews that mostly stay out of the way. Why can't they cover NASCAR the same way?
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I wish both networks would have their NASCAR production teams watch Fox's IMSA and NBC's IndyCar coverage. The networks have demonstrated they're capable of putting on broadcasts with the emphasis on the racing and informative booth crews that mostly stay out of the way. Why can't they cover NASCAR the same way?
Click to expand...

Give me Fox NASCAR's broadcast team and NASCAR on NBC's overall production team and you'd have one damn fine broadcast.

Fox's weakness is production and NBC's weakness is commentary.

NBC deserves a lot of credit for trying to mix things up though. They had Leigh Diffey call a few races last year. They put Mike Bagley in one race which was fun. They've tried mixing up the booth with Jarrett some weeks.
 
This is definitely a good move. ABC's coverage was half hearted at best. If you compare the run-of-the-mill NBC telecasts to even ABC's best effort, the contrast is absolutely stark. ABC was lethargic simply because they had Indycar for so long that they took it for granted. They never dreamed Indycar would consider a better deal, and yet, there was one out there.

NBC billed itself as "your home for open wheeled racing," and they were well on their way to being that except they lost F1. I think they see the upcoming civil war between the teams and Liberty media and didn't make much of an effort to keep it. What a stinking mess that could end up being.
 
Doc Austin said:
NBC billed itself as "your home for open wheeled racing," and they were well on their way to being that except they lost F1. I think they see the upcoming civil war between the teams and Liberty media and didn't make much of an effort to keep it. What a stinking mess that could end up being.
Click to expand...

NBC wasn't going to do a deal with F1 in which F1 retained all digital rights for itself. F1 sees more value in the subscription streaming service they are launching than a relatively low $ U.S. broadcast rights deal. That was where it broke down, and NBC Sports wasn't happy after the efforts they had made to invest in the partnership. But that's business. ESPN picked up the rights for free (zero rights fee) and little production investment, since they'll using the international feed and announcers.
 
gnomesayin said:
This is likely because the NBC IndyCar broadcasts are produced by IndyCar's own production company, not NBC Sports.
Click to expand...
Ah, now I understand. So the solution is for NASCAR to pay IndyCar to have the open-wheel boys produce stock car coverage? o_O
 
gnomesayin said:
F1 sees more value in the subscription streaming service they are launching than a relatively low $ U.S. broadcast rights deal.
Click to expand...

Why would Americans pay to see uncompetitive racing with ugly cars, driven by everything but Americans? Yeah, good luck with that subscription thing in America where can watch fast, competitive, swoopy looking Indycars driven by Americans for free.

ESPN picked up the rights for free (zero rights fee) and little production investment...............
Click to expand...

They paid zero, which might tell you something about their commitment.

................ since they'll (be) using the international feed and announcers.
Click to expand...

More non-American crap for the American market. You couldn't even make this stuff up.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Ah, now I understand. So the solution is for NASCAR to pay IndyCar to have the open-wheel boys produce stock car coverage? o_O
Click to expand...

Reading between the lines, I believe this "unique" arrangement came into being because back in 2008 when IndyCar struck the deal with the Versus network, there was very, very little interest in the broadcast rights for the last 2/3 of the IndyCar season. Neither ABC / ESPN nor any other major network wanted to invest in those races, and though Versus was owned by Comcast, it was run on a small budget. By necessity, IndyCar basically had to figure out how to make its own TV broadcasts and find a network willing to air them. Ten years later, there is a wider sports TV landscape, IndyCar has the infrastructure in place, and NBC recognizes the value there.

So the answer, if one is looking for racing broadcasts made by racing people, would appear to be that NASCAR needs to fall close to deathbed territory, take over its own production, and reemerge. Just kidding.
 
Last edited:
Charlie Spencer said:
As long Michael Waltrip is on board, I'll continue to disagree with you. Even DW settles down once he gets his catch phrase out of his system. Mikey is like a Spinal Tap amplifier, always set to 11.
Click to expand...

I don't know why they keep Michael Waltrip around. I have yet to meet a fan who enjoys his antics.
 
Doc Austin said:
Why would Americans pay to see uncompetitive racing with ugly cars, driven by everything but Americans? Yeah, good luck with that subscription thing in America where can watch fast, competitive, swoopy looking Indycars driven by Americans for free.
Click to expand...

I don't know how it will fare, so I have no comment at this time. It's been delayed indefinitely, which is a bad way to launch anything. I know that the rights fee NBC was paying under the previous agreement was $3 million, and not likely to increase significantly, so F1 doesn't actually have to get that many subscribers at $10 per month to replace that revenue. I like F1 racing, but wish it were much more competitive.

Doc Austin said:
They paid zero, which might tell you something about their commitment.
Click to expand...

It certainly does. ESPN's current commitment to motorsports is nil. They're just filling hours on the schedule with cheap content.
 
gnomesayin said:
I know that the rights fee NBC was paying under the previous agreement was $3 million, and not likely to increase significantly, so F1 doesn't actually have to get that many subscribers at $10 per month to replace that revenue
Click to expand...

Unless my math is wrong, that would be 300,000 subscribers. I would imagine that's not an impossible target, but would you pay it when Indycar is more entertaining and free on top of it?

Consider every race is likely to be a Mercedes rout, virtually no one will be passing anyone and on top of that, these are the ugliest cars we have ever seen ....... are there really going to be 300,000 people with money to burn on that kind of no entertainment?

I'm not sure either way, but one thing is absolutely certain: If the teams break away and form their own series, none of these TV packages are going to succeed. You can ask Indycar about that.


I like F1 racing, but wish it were much more competitive.
Click to expand...

They are so obsessed with their image as being technically "superior" that they will not clamp down on all the aerodynamic silliness that's wrecking the racing. That's really all there is to it. I think half of the little aero bits you see on the cars are designed to do nothing more but create turbulence that messes up the following car. Even if it's not deliberate, that's still the end result: impossible overtaking.

Indycar recently slashed their aero package and in the very first race at St. Petersburg smashed existing records for passing at that event. This is only one reason Indycar has better racing, but we can save that for an discussion.

Formula One's biggest problem is that it is trying to be the ultimate of everything. They want have the ultimate in technology, as if that's not going to create massive disparity. How can you have a competitive sport when the technical disparity has the top cars running around four seconds a lap faster than the others? How can you have a competitive series when a third of the field is in their own race, another third's most realistic target is eight place, and the other third is simply hopeless? Then they turn around and want it to also be a driver's championship. Like, how can you determine who the best drive is when one is in a Mercedes and another in a Sauber?

I'm pretty sure F1 at a crossroads and need to redefine itself. There is too much good racing for free for me to pay to watch something that's not competitive or entertaining.
 
$10 per month, not per year. A full-time subscriber will pay around $100 per year. Even if you slash that in half, at $50 annual average revenue per paying subscriber, that is a paltry 60,000 subscribers. If they get to 100,000 within a couple years, they are already way ahead and have built a direct subscriber base, which has its own value.

In strict business terms, F1 has probably made a smart move to get in front of this. ESPN and ESPN2 average far higher ratings than NBCSN, so TV ratings are likely to be up as well.

I hate that the NBC F1 on-air crew got dumped though, and will miss them.
 
Last edited:
Doc Austin said:
Why would Americans pay to see uncompetitive racing with ugly cars, driven by everything but Americans?
Click to expand...
'Ugly' is subjective; some of us don't care what the cars look like. Others of us don't care where a driver was born if he can get the most out of the car.

Uncompetitive? Okay, you got me on that one. For me, that's the deal breaker all by itself. They could run 'Vettes, Vipers, and DeLoreans driven by descendants of the Mayflower pilgrims, but I'm still not watching a parade.
 
gnomesayin said:
I hate that the NBC F1 on-air crew got dumped though, and will miss them.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. I hope Matchette can make a few guest appearances on Indycar like he did last year. Hobbs would be a natural for IMSA. I saw Difey doing Australian surfing the other day, so clearly he will always have a job.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
'Ugly' is subjective;
Click to expand...

Sure, a lot of ugly is subjective, but you would be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks the new cars are sleek and sexy.

.........some of us don't care what the cars look like.
Click to expand...

You mean a car's aesthetics is not a part of it's appeal?

Come on......... we're car guys. We like sleek and sexy cars. I mean, otherwise they may as well be racing Ford Pintos. At least those would burst into flames once in awhile and inject some entertainment.

I'm sort of on both sides of this fence. We have seen plenty of ugly cars over the years, so this is nothing new. What is new is that these new F1 cars don't even look like cars anymore. But, you know, there's a line you just can't cross, and ugly cars that race like crap, for me anyway, is that line.

Others of us don't care where a driver was born if he can get the most out of the car.
Click to expand...

The entire world, except for America, is engrossed in nationalism and waving their own flag. Virtually every Formula One fan roots for their own countrymen, except Italians who root for the Italian Ferraris. Americans can't do that because American drivers never get a favor shake in Formula One. Now if you want to put Alexander Rossi in a Merc, Ferrari or Red Bull, this would be a completely different conversation.

Uncompetitive? Okay, you got me on that one. For me, that's the deal breaker all by itself.
Click to expand...

There's lots of good racing for free, starting with Indycar and IMSA. I wish we could get the ELMS here. They are set for 35 full season prototypes. That's one hell of a grid of swoopy cars, and you can bet the racing will be spectacular.
 
Sorry I missed this:

gnomesayin said:
It certainly does. ESPN's current commitment to motorsports is nil. They're just filling hours on the schedule with cheap content.
Click to expand...

Even their old commitment in the 80s was a result of needing content. You may notice that as soon as they got MLB and NHL auto racing sort of disappeared. Before that we had Mickey Thompson stadium racing, desert racing, even lawnmower racing, and on and on. When they pulled out of everything, that created the vacuum that Speedvision emerged out of.

So, I can only imagine ESPN scooped F1 up on the cheapo, but the question is why didn't NBC take it on the cheap instead? I'm guessing the know Liberty media is going to make a mess out of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom