Monster Energy's status as a sponsor of NASCAR

Mopardh9 said:
I had a favorite driver, Bill Elliot, after he retired I followed Kasey Kahne in the 9 Dodge for a few years. After that, when the racing started to be boring and I stopped going to Vegas for the Cup races, I just hoped for good racing. I like Truex and some of the young guns, but to say I have a favorite that I pull for every week...it just isn't there. The passion isn't there anymore, I'm hoping beyond hope that the Gen 7 car brings that back, but I'm not holding my breath.
Click to expand...
I am afraid your going to become another occasional watcher. If racing doesn't get your blood flowing there isn't much a different car can do for you.
I was on the fence about watching all the races until I discovered the reason. It was nothing to do with the cars or Nascar stupidity. It was the drivers attitude that was turning me off. With all the big names gone (after Harvick) I expect things will get much better. These young drivers won't be so privileged and we are at the point where any of them can be replaced regardless of their status. MK is a good example. He was always in contention for the win yet he himself is no longer in demand.
Racing is going to be much better in the near future.
 
Team Penske said:
I am afraid your going to become another occasional watcher. If racing doesn't get your blood flowing there isn't much a different car can do for you.
I was on the fence about watching all the races until I discovered the reason. It was nothing to do with the cars or Nascar stupidity. It was the drivers attitude that was turning me off. With all the big names gone (after Harvick) I expect things will get much better. These young drivers won't be so privileged and we are at the point where any of them can be replaced regardless of their status. MK is a good example. He was always in contention for the win yet he himself is no longer in demand.
Racing is going to be much better in the near future.
Click to expand...
I hope so and I wish Nascar wouldn't farm out their broadcasts to affiliate networks, I cut back on my cable channels, as the prices are outrageous, so I no longer can watch all the races unless I go on my laptop. Forget watching most if all the truck races. I just hope this new car makes the racing better, it's not the drivers who have turned me off, it's the lack of consistently good racing. I'm no longer going to waste my time in the summer watching 3 hours of boredom to only see 15 minutes of excitement at the end of a race. That's why i'm and advocate of races being no longer that 300 miles with the exception of the Daytona 500 and the Memorial day 600.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I dunno about Skoal and Mopar, but I watch to see them goldurn cars get smashed up! Whooooooeeeeee! ;)
Click to expand...
Nothing like steaming piles of plastic, Styrofoam, and metal to get the old ticker to skip a beat.
Charlie Spencer said:
In the spirit of the holiday season, I cordially invite you to attempt a physiologically challenging act of individual reproduction.
And I mean that in the nicest possible way. :moon:
Click to expand...
Hmm....note to self....no Christmas gift from Charlie this year.......:(
Mopardh9 said:
I had a favorite driver, Bill Elliot, after he retired I followed Kasey Kahne in the 9 Dodge for a few years. After that, when the racing started to be boring and I stopped going to Vegas for the Cup races, I just hoped for good racing. I like Truex and some of the young guns, but to say I have a favorite that I pull for every week...it just isn't there. The passion isn't there anymore, I'm hoping beyond hope that the Gen 7 car brings that back, but I'm not holding my breath.
Click to expand...
I just hope Nascar has not gone down the black hole of gimmicks to have made good racing next to impossible.
Team Penske said:
I am afraid your going to become another occasional watcher. If racing doesn't get your blood flowing there isn't much a different car can do for you.
I was on the fence about watching all the races until I discovered the reason. It was nothing to do with the cars or Nascar stupidity. It was the drivers attitude that was turning me off. With all the big names gone (after Harvick) I expect things will get much better. These young drivers won't be so privileged and we are at the point where any of them can be replaced regardless of their status. MK is a good example. He was always in contention for the win yet he himself is no longer in demand.
Racing is going to be much better in the near future.
Click to expand...
As far as on track product goes I am afraid it will be a case of the more things change the more they stay the same. There are a lot of things that go into making a race good or bad for a lot of the fans as can be seen in the rate the race threads. Some see a good race as certain driver(s) wrecking out or certain driver(s) doing well and I believe one person knocks his ratings down because of the parade of Toyota's at the front of the pack. To me that is daft as if they are putting on a show who cares if it is Toyota, Kia or Ford that is doing it? Complaining about the manufacturer at the front is like receiving a million dollar check and bitching about the penmanship.
 
aunty dive said:
Master of the over-thought sweeping generalization.

There are as many different kinds of race-fans as there are race-fans. Not everything has to be compartmentalized.
Click to expand...

Nailed it....and catering to one type is the problem NASCAR is having. Hint, hint....the car is a bit more significant than a ball....My two cents.
 


NASCAR awaits Monster’s decision on Cup Series sponsorship
Six month ago executives from NASCAR and Monster spoke positively about their still new and developing relationship that saw the energy drink maker take over entitlement sponsorship duties from Sprint, which had the role since 2004. Both sides were optimistic Monster would exercise a two-year option and remain in the role through 2020, with a decision needed by December.

But in the months since the bloom has fallen off the rose to some degree and behind the scenes there isn’t as much enthusiasm Monster will re-up its deal. In fact, Monster not only asked for an extension of the December deadline — until just after the first of the year — but also asked for a second extension until the spring, multiple industry sources told SB Nation. NASCAR granted both requests, though has quietly begun identifying new and potential replacements in case Monster doesn’t renew.

Although Monster has its share of critics who feel more could be done related to television buys and at-track activation, the reality is the company has brought a much needed fresh approach that has nudged NASCAR out of its comfort zone. And if Monster were to opt out, it places NASCAR in a precarious position for the second time in three years where the search for an entitlement sponsor becomes a pervasive cloud hanging over the season overshadowing what’s happening on the track.

Such a search would occur during a period where the sport badly needs stability as it attempts to combat tepid television ratings and attendance and woo a younger demographic only complicates matters. Any potential change brings the likelihood NASCAR won’t be able to find a sponsor that can market the sport as effectively as Monster can to casual and new fans alike.

“This is only the first year and there are always growing pains, but we're thrilled,” NASCAR CEO and chairman Brian France said on the morning of the championship finale. “The promises they've made, they've kept, with the young demo, edgy shows, edgy marketing, putting our drivers in different places in different light. That's what we want. They've delivered on that.”
 
I am not sure what the holdup is and normally these things are money related but this has a different feel to me and seems more related to fit. We know what is in it for NASCAR but what about Monster? They are dropping 20 million a year to gain access to a bunch of people over 50 and is that the target market they wish?

I ain't worried about it as the future will take care of itself and we will all live happily ever after.
 
I think most of us here have been asking that same question from the day the partnership was announced. Maybe Monster has begun asking it too. Maybe they saw a relatively cheap sponsorship opportunity somewhat in line with their other properties and decided to take a two-year shot at it. Maybe I'll finally get a pony for Christmas.
 
Maybe this time, NASCAR will have an easier time finding a company that will sign a long-term contract. Now everyone, even Brian ;), can see that NASCAR will not get $100 million/year from their title sponsor. If NASCAR asks $20 million or so, more companies might go for that.
 
Candace66 said:
Maybe this time, NASCAR will have an easier time finding a company that will sign a long-term contract. Now everyone, even Brian ;), can see that NASCAR will not get $100 million/year from their title sponsor. If NASCAR asks $20 million or so, more companies might go for that.
Click to expand...

With the way things are today I would be surprised if anyone signed for more than a couple of years at a max of 15 million. IMO NASCAR would be better off to go without a sponsor than get dumped by a different company each year. Like empty seats and lack of viewers from home the title sponsor issue is bad for the brand.
 
Nascar needs a title sponsor for the duration of their TV contract. Then they can hire a production company, start their own TV channel for showing races and weekly shows. They would make their money by selling commercial time and TV time on their channel. This would cut out most of the middle persons and allow smaller productions that some watch at present.
 
I dunno if NASCAR is interested in running its own network. It would depend on how much money they can get by continuing to let networks pay for the rights.

Historically they don't know that number until late in the next-to-last contracted season. I don't think 16-18 months would give them enough time to put together all the necessary pieces (production company, cable / carrier agreements, digital rights, sign up subscribers if they go that route, etc). If they decide bringing it in house is the way to go, look for a short-term TV contract (2-3 years) while they get their act together.

But I don't know squat about the business and could be completely full of used lug nuts and tire marbles.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I dunno if NASCAR is interested in running its own network. It would depend on how much money they can get by continuing to let networks pay for the rights.

Historically they don't know that number until late in the next-to-last contracted season. I don't think 16-18 months would give them enough time to put together all the necessary pieces (production company, cable / carrier agreements, digital rights, sign up subscribers if they go that route, etc). If they decide bringing it in house is the way to go, look for a short-term TV contract (2-3 years) while they get their act together.

But I don't know squat about the business and could be completely full of used lug nuts and tire marbles.
Click to expand...
I would think if they created their own network it would be pay /view, and I wouldn't think that would generate much interest.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
How much is that per season? The web search results I found were coy about the price.
Click to expand...
NFL Sunday Ticket "full-season retail price is $239.94"

If that were offered as a commercial free option to the current broadcasts, I'd be all over that. Obviously not everyone is going to pay that. They could never go to a pay-per-view only option.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
NFL Sunday Ticket "full-season retail price is $239.94"

If that were offered as a commercial free option to the current broadcasts, I'd be all over that. Obviously not everyone is going to pay that. They could never go to a pay-per-view only option.
Click to expand...
Can you buy the NFL ticket without a cable subscription/provider?
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
NFL Sunday Ticket "full-season retail price is $239.94"

If that were offered as a commercial free option to the current broadcasts, I'd be all over that. Obviously not everyone is going to pay that. They could never go to a pay-per-view only option.
Click to expand...
I dunno. That's about what I'm paying to get the Dish tier with some of the networks that get used in emergencies (FS2, etc.), and Darling Bride likes Golf Channel on that same tier. If it was just me, I could probably drop down two full tiers and easily afford it.

On the other hand, I don't know if an NASCAR network would command the same price as the NFL.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
On the other hand, I don't know if an NASCAR network would command the same price as the NFL.
Click to expand...
I am going to say no, you remember the SPEED channel?, that was close to a NASCAR channel and it did not do to well in the later years, I think the shipped has sailed for that, just my little ole opinion
 
Since the conversation has gone down this road... The whole notion of "channels" is archaic, IMHO.
 
Candace66 said:
Since the conversation has gone down this road... The whole notion of "channels" is archaic, IMHO.
Click to expand...

See I don’t believe so. As the net neutrality **** shows, these companies are gonna fight back. Don’t wanna subscribe to cable then fine, we’re gonna hit your streaming stuff hard or throttle them
 
Candace66 said:
Since the conversation has gone down this road... The whole notion of "channels" is archaic, IMHO.
Click to expand...
I'm not following you. Why do you think so?

I think the notion is valid, although the working definition may have changed. I use the word to include broadcast networks, cable- / satellite-only networks (including premium and pay-per-view content), and Internet-delivered feeds. I have no experience with the latter so if my impression of them as equivalent to channels is mistaken, please explain my error.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I'm not following you. Why do you think so?

I think the notion is valid, although the working definition may have changed. I use the word to include broadcast networks, cable- / satellite-only networks (including premium and pay-per-view content), and Internet-delivered feeds. I have no experience with the latter so if my impression of them as equivalent to channels is mistaken, please explain my error.
Click to expand...

"Channels" used to be defined by the actual frequency that a particular TV station broadcast on. But as you move away from terrestrial broadcasting, I don't see why things still need to be organized into channels.

Here's an example. NASCAR is the only sport I'm interested in watching. Then why do I have to pay for one or more 24/7 channels when all I want to see are a few hours each weekend they're racing? o_O (And though "skinny bundles" and other arrangements are appearing, the reality has been that you paid for 200-300 channels or whatever, even if all you wanted to see was NASCAR !)

I should be able to just get a subscription for NASCAR. That would allow me to see the races (including some pre- and post-race) live, and maybe a little other related coverage as well. All of which I could either watch live or record for later viewing. This could be occurring on a TV set via cable or satellite, or over the internet.

BTW, I haven't owned a TV since 2005. And generally I only see 1-3 races per year on TV. Which means I've found alternative ways to follow the sport. :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pat
Candace66 said:
... I should be able to just get a subscription for NASCAR. That would allow me to see the races (including some pre- and post-race) live, and maybe a little other related coverage as well. All of which I could either watch live or record for later viewing. This could be occurring on a TV set via cable or satellite, or over the internet.

BTW, I haven't owned a TV since 2005. And generally I only see 1-3 races per year on TV. Which means I've found alternative ways to follow the sport. :cool:
Click to expand...
That sounds like a channel to me, but call it what you want.

Should I ask about the legality of those alternative ways?
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I dunno. That's about what I'm paying to get the Dish tier with some of the networks that get used in emergencies (FS2, etc.), and Darling Bride likes Golf Channel on that same tier. If it was just me, I could probably drop down two full tiers and easily afford it.

On the other hand, I don't know if an NASCAR network would command the same price as the NFL.
Click to expand...
I can't see how they could even charge half that.
 
I get 200 channels from DISH. I have the ones I watch listed in a separate guide. There are only 53 channels I have any interest in. That is a lot of channels to buy a la carte. I'm not sure it would be cost effective. I pay $90 and I'm happy keeping it below $100.
 
Pat said:
I get 200 channels from DISH. I have the ones I watch listed in a separate guide. There are only 53 channels I have any interest in. That is a lot of channels to buy a la carte. I'm not sure it would be cost effective. I pay $90 and I'm happy keeping it below $100.
Click to expand...
I bitched at Comcast because they were constantly screwing up our bill, so I threatened to end my service. They in turn gave us 260 channels, all the sports channels, all the movie channels and high speed Internet for same price we were paying for the lowest tier next to basic. It's for a year, but I'll take it. I'd love to cut the cord, but need high speed Internet and there aren't any independent Internet companies in my area. Stuck, not liking that option, but it's all I got.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pat
Pat said:
I get 200 channels from DISH. I have the ones I watch listed in a separate guide. There are only 53 channels I have any interest in. That is a lot of channels to buy a la carte. I'm not sure it would be cost effective. I pay $90 and I'm happy keeping it below $100.
Click to expand...
I get 245 channels with Direct TV and only have 67 on my favorites list that I'm interested in. I pay $117.02 a month for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pat
Mopardh9 said:
I bitched at Comcast because they were constantly screwing up our bill, so I threatened to end my service. They in turn gave us 260 channels, all the sports channels, all the movie channels and high speed Internet for same price we were paying for the lowest tier next to basic. It's for a year, but I'll take it. I'd love to cut the cord, but need high speed Internet and there aren't any independent Internet companies in my area. Stuck, not liking that option, but it's all I got.
Click to expand...
I cut the TV cord with Cox cable but kept their highest speed internet for $80 a month. The price for the internet connection is the same as it was when I had the TV combined with it.
 
I was paying about 200 for DIRECTV and internet from att. I called them saying I was going to cancel and they dropped the price to $100 a month total.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pat
Uh, I think we have got a bit off topic.
th
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pat
GenerationZRacingFan said:
I believe this topic was about the status of Monster Energy's sponsorship of NASCAR, not about streaming and how many channels you get with DISH and DirectTV.
Just putting that out there.
Click to expand...
I repeat myself. And? It's the off season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sdj
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom