NASCAR hits the market with new multi-tier sponsorship model

Spotter22 said:
Thats an assumption, why must you always project a negative outcome?
Click to expand...

That is a more than fair question. I don’t see it as negative but as being realistic. Specific to this situation Nascar can’t find a title sponsor that will ante up so they have to come up with something that allows them to save face. If this model was as lucrative as we are being led to believe it would have been implemented years ago.

I hope I am wrong and will be happy to admit that I was wrong if the initiative is successful
 
IanMcVittie said:
That is a more than fair question. I don’t see it as negative but as being realistic. Specific to this situation Nascar can’t find a title sponsor that will ante up so they have to come up with something that allows them to save face. If this model was as lucrative as we are being led to believe it would have been implemented years ago.

I hope I am wrong and will be happy to admit that I was wrong if the initiative is successful
Click to expand...
Again you are projecting a negative outcome before the project has been implemented or without knowledge of how its being recieved by Corporate America or Internationally.
 
DIDIT said:
"NASCAR is asking around $20 million for top-tier slots in its proposed new sponsorship model, close to double original estimates, according to sources."

Wow, what an amusing way to introduce us to this new concept by the author. NASCAR can ask whatever it wants, but what really matters is what does it sell for? I only see this as a way we will be feed even more advertising crap every race weekend. One day I envision each port-o-let at the track to have its own sponsorship and the broadcasters will tell us who is the sponsor of each and every lap of a 500 lap race.
Click to expand...
Ideally the broadcasters sharing in the revenue will help reduce time spent on commercial. Race title sponsorship is sold separately between the track and the networks, so it's not uncommon to see a race advertised as the ______ 500 online but referred to as just as the Texas 500 on TV.

I don't think NASCAR will get as much as they're asking for either, but I'm not sure it matters because I doubt the teams will get much, if any, of that. More important is getting extra revenue for the broadcasters and getting some of these sponsors to spend on promoting the sport more than Monster did (which I think they really sucked at, whether or not it was their fault).
 
Spotter22 said:
Again you are projecting a negative outcome before the project has been implemented or without knowledge of how its being recieved by Corporate America or Internationally.
Click to expand...

If Nascar had a better track record over the last 15 years I would have confidence. However they have made grievous errors either by commission or omission early and often.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Ideally the broadcasters sharing in the revenue will help reduce time spent on commercial. Race title sponsorship is sold separately between the track and the networks, so it's not uncommon to see a race advertised as the ______ 500 online but referred to as just as the Texas 500 on TV.

I don't think NASCAR will get as much as they're asking for either, but I'm not sure it matters because I doubt the teams will get much, if any, of that. More important is getting extra revenue for the broadcasters and getting some of these sponsors to spend on promoting the sport more than Monster did (which I think they really sucked at, whether or not it was their fault).
Click to expand...

This is for another time but in retrospect it probably would have been better had left the handset down and not called Nascar personally
 
These fees are found money for Nascar. Yes they did make a ton of money in the past at which time Nascar was growing and everything was rosy.
Much has changed since those days and many households just don't have the money these days.
The decline of Nascar's rating will determine it's future footprint in the world of sports
and also the the fees it can charge. Brian being the man in charge at the time thought Monster would be a great mix for his drinks, he was wrong. Like everything else they need a new model
to solicit these funds and I applause them for looking at changing the way things are done.

Before jumping on the bandwagon to say how wrong they are, please inform us of your
successes in this field. :rolleyes: :sarcasm:
 
Spotter22 said:
Thats an assumption, why must you always project a negative outcome?
Click to expand...
I can speak from my career working in the corporate environment, rarely would a company project a negative as a negative...even when they laid off 500 employees the week before Christmas, it was always a good thing. I like to believe I can see through corporate and marketing BS, and this move by NASCAR is exactly that...in my opinion.
 
IanMcVittie said:
I agree that asking and getting are 2 different things. I think Nascar will tout this new model as a great success when in reality it was probably just to give them an out for being unable to secure a title sponsor.
Click to expand...
Spotter22 said:
Thats an assumption, why must you always project a negative outcome?
Click to expand...
I didn't see the post as projecting a negative outcome. A negative assumption about the background motivations maybe, but nothing at all about the eventual outcome.
 
DIDIT said:
I can speak from my career working in the corporate environment, rarely would a company project a negative as a negative...even when they laid off 500 employees the week before Christmas, it was always a good thing. I like to believe I can see through corporate and marketing BS, and this move by NASCAR is exactly that...in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Nobody wants to be laid off, but I prefer as much warning as possible, especially heading into Christmas. Better to get a month's warning like the GM employees are getting, than handed a pink slip on Dec. 31st after you've already run up the holiday bills.
 
DIDIT said:
I can speak from my career working in the corporate environment, rarely would a company project a negative as a negative...even when they laid off 500 employees the week before Christmas, it was always a good thing. I like to believe I can see through corporate and marketing BS, and this move by NASCAR is exactly that...in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Thats the beauty, we will see if his projection was correct
 
Mopardh9 said:
I love nascar, i want it to survive, why do you sugarcoat a failing sport?
Click to expand...
Where have I sugar coated anything? Just because I don't come here to moan and groan about everything Nascar, doesn't mean I agree with every thing. I have made many suggestions of what changes I would make. I also pointed out specifics of what I don't like. Here is a short list of what I think will improve the product.
1. Pit for fuel and tires only under green.
2. Throw caution at end of stage, reline cars for restart and go green ( must have commercial time in every sport)
3. CHANGE how races are televised. Go back to 2 commentators and get rid of story lines.
The TV product is what is making people tune out. Why is radio to viable?

I can't go back to being 30 and neither can Nascar. They have to learn to appease the people who live on cell phones.
 
Team Penske said:
Where have I sugar coated anything? Just because I don't come here to moan and groan about everything Nascar, doesn't mean I agree with every thing. I have made many suggestions of what changes I would make. I also pointed out specifics of what I don't like. Here is a short list of what I think will improve the product.
1. Pit for fuel and tires only under green.
2. Throw caution at end of stage, reline cars for restart and go green ( must have commercial time in every sport)
3. CHANGE how races are televised. Go back to 2 commentators and get rid of story lines.
The TV product is what is making people tune out. Why is radio to viable?

I can't go back to being 30 and neither can Nascar. They have to learn to appease the people who live on cell phones.
Click to expand...
NASCAR killed itself with gimmicks, they kid no one, all the changes have bit them in the ass. I'm not doom and gloom, what I am is a realist, I don't know how many times I've said that here...probably at least 10. I'm for changes to the plus side, NASCAR has only made changes ,outside of safety, to the negative. When you get rid of seats at every track, that tells me across the board NASCAR is flailing, they don't have a clue.
 
Mopardh9 said:
NASCAR killed itself with gimmicks, they kid no one, all the changes have bit them in the ass. I'm not doom and gloom, what I am is a realist, I don't know how many times I've said that here...probably at least 10. I'm for changes to the plus side, NASCAR has only made changes ,outside of safety, to the negative. When you get rid of seats at every track, that tells me across the board NASCAR is flailing, they don't have a clue.
Click to expand...
Getting rid of seats means they had expectations (right or wrong) and now they must correct that and find other ways to generate income. The sole purpose of having these events or any other is to generate income. The main reason to have 1.5 mile tracks was first to entice IRL and maybe a F1 race. The large track also meant more room in the infield and more seating room.
No one ever considered if the racing would be any good.
 
that tells me across the board NASCAR is flailing, they don't have a clue.[/QUOTE]
I suggest you compare your yearly income growth against the rate Nascar generates money.
Think how rich they would be if they has a clue. :p

What would you suggest as changes to make things better????? Don't tell me what they are doing wrong, just tell us what you would do if you were put in charge.
 
Mopardh9 said:
NASCAR killed itself with gimmicks, they kid no one, all the changes have bit them in the ass. I'm not doom and gloom, what I am is a realist, I don't know how many times I've said that here...probably at least 10. I'm for changes to the plus side, NASCAR has only made changes ,outside of safety, to the negative. When you get rid of seats at every track, that tells me across the board NASCAR is flailing, they don't have a clue.
Click to expand...

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
 
Mopardh9 said:
I'm for changes to the plus side, NASCAR has only made changes ,outside of safety, to the negative.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure NASCAR made all of those changes with the intent of improving popularity, and maybe even improving the racing. The same could be said of the suggestions all of us make here on a regular basis. WE think they're good ideas, but nobody knows how any idea will truly work out until it's implemented. Our brilliant 'improvements' may not work out any better than NASCAR's changes.

Nobody in Daytona wakes up and wonders, "Hey, how can I screw up the sport today?" Even BZF was merely incompetent, not downright malicious.
 
Mopardh9 said:
Nascar is flailing once again.
Click to expand...

If you think about all the initiatives Nascar has mandated over the years what have been truly embraced compared to panned? Everyone is allowed mistakes but this should be the exception not the rule. Mistakes rule Nascar
 
IanMcVittie said:
If you think about all the initiatives Nascar has mandated over the years what have been truly embraced compared to panned? Everyone is allowed mistakes but this should be the exception not the rule. Mistakes rule Nascar
Click to expand...
They continue to shoot themselves in the foot, it's a regular occurence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom