NASCAR - Television Ratings Thread

NASCAR Apologist said:
https://racing-forums.com/threads/nascar-2019-bold-prediction-thread.66598/page-6#post-1529399

fff8a77ca88910dbc780514a5d7f2a2e.gif
Click to expand...
Even though you aren't in the game you have my vote
 
Interesting how Cup ratings are up 3-6% it seems for all but 1-2 races so far, ratings are up for the Truck Series (not surprising, Trucks are the most compelling product in NASCAR), yet Xfinity is down 12%. They don't want Kyle stinking up the show? Need a few more standalones?
 
aunty dive said:
I haven’t done much reading, scrolling or posting for the past few months. Maybe you realized that and then forgot it in 5 minutes. You know what I mean.
Click to expand...
Yes I have noticed your absence. Sometimes those 5 min are only as long as a trip from the couch to the kitchen. :D
 
Spotter22 said:
NASCAR, will be around longer then you haters. How much money, what network, how many in the seats? No matter the sport it will survive without you. NASCAR out performs most of the top end sports on TV, fact! So now what?
Click to expand...

Drama
 
mack said:
Its all good in my hood. NASCAR tv ratings are showing signs of improvement. Maybe the bottom has been found. I'm looking for brighter days ahead. Would anyone like some pie?
Click to expand...

I agree that after 15 years NASCAR may have finally hit bottom in terms of TV ratings. It is a very good thing as they could not afford another year like 2018.

What will be interesting to see is if they can start adding some new and younger fans as if that happens life will be truly good.
 
I've come to realize that I get one vote during a race for watching NASCAR Live on Fox/S1 or NBC/SN and one vote for simultaneously listening to MRN/PRN coverage.

I live in the North Georgia mountains and I see a few NASCAR Bumper Stickers (most are old and worn) but I don't know of too many others who are into it. When I talk to friends who want to do something on Sundays and I tell them I'll be watching NASCAR, they give it a passing nod without any follow up. I just hope the party lasts until they finally go electric or I fall off a rock hiking in the Smoky Mountains.

TV works for me, because I've since sworn off most mob festival events, especially after Sturgis. I could care less how many people are in the stands, especially if they are getting ready to chuck their beer or climb a catch fence. I just like watching cars getting set up to race -- then race -- and as they are racing make adjustments to beat their competitors.

I might attend the ROVAL because that was a hard driving fun event last year, and perhaps the night Bristol that everyone talks about. But as I plan for these races I don't fret about NASCAR as a business -- it would spoil the racing for me.
 
Ventisca said:
I've come to realize that I get one vote during a race for watching NASCAR Live on Fox/S1 or NBC/SN and one vote for simultaneously listening to MRN/PRN coverage.

I live in the North Georgia mountains and I see a few NASCAR Bumper Stickers (most are old and worn) but I don't know of too many others who are into it. When I talk to friends who want to do something on Sundays and I tell them I'll be watching NASCAR, they give it a passing nod without any follow up. I just hope the party lasts until they finally go electric or I fall off a rock hiking in the Smoky Mountains.

TV works for me, because I've since sworn off most mob festival events, especially after Sturgis. I could care less how many people are in the stands, especially if they are getting ready to chuck their beer or climb a catch fence. I just like watching cars getting set up to race -- then race -- and as they are racing make adjustments to beat their competitors.

I might attend the ROVAL because that was a hard driving fun event last year, and perhaps the night Bristol that everyone talks about. But as I plan for these races I don't fret about NASCAR as a business -- it would spoil the racing for me.
Click to expand...

I love Cherokee County in North Ga as well as carving my way through Suches. Too many people from the Atlanta area have encroached though.

I don’t think anyone should worry about anything concerning the business of Nascar and I agree that the size of the crowd or TV ratings should not impact the enjoyment of the race.
 
.NASCAR’s ratings have gone up slightly this year. What do you attribute it too?

My guess is that the 2019 rules caused some fans to tune in out of curiosity and some definitely like it. I think the biggest reason is that after last year’s brutal losses things have finally bottomed out.
 
IanMcVittie said:
My guess is that the 2019 rules caused some fans to tune in out of curiosity and some definitely like it. I think the biggest reason is that after last year’s brutal losses things have finally bottomed out.
Click to expand...

It could be a bounce... :D

But even with all the changes its still enjoyable for me to watch talent rise and fall, cars come and go throughout a race and throughout a season, and teams adapt to shifting rules, etc -- it all makes for a satisfying NASCAR Cup Event on Saturday Night or Sunday.

There are so many things to be picky about beyond the obvious Qualifying fiasco that has all sides throwing blame and names at each other,
and many exasperated pundits devising new (and old) rules and formats to solve this Qualifying evolutionary process.

I just can't see where it has reached the point where I will swear off NASCAR and go buy a kayak, start a new hobby, or go "antiquing" on a Sunday instead of sit down and watch the cars roar to life and race each other. Sure, you don't know what quality of event you'll get -- but if it's really bad (like Quals) this place gets really fun. :)
 
Ventisca said:
It could be a bounce... :D

But even with all the changes its still enjoyable for me to watch talent rise and fall, cars come and go throughout a race and throughout a season, and teams adapt to shifting rules, etc -- it all makes for a satisfying NASCAR Cup Event on Saturday Night or Sunday.

There are so many things to be picky about beyond the obvious Qualifying fiasco that has all sides throwing blame and names at each other,
and many exasperated pundits devising new (and old) rules and formats to solve this Qualifying evolutionary process.

I just can't see where it has reached the point where I will swear off NASCAR and go buy a kayak, start a new hobby, or go "antiquing" on a Sunday instead of sit down and watch the cars roar to life and race each other. Sure, you don't know what quality of event you'll get -- but if it's really bad (like Quals) this place gets really fun. :)
Click to expand...

Good post and despite all the ups and downs over the years I still see the majority of the races from home. I think if Nascar could attract some new manufacturers like Kia or VW it would create more interest, better attendance and higher ratings.

I think the Chinese market is ripe for the picking and having a Chinese manufacturer come on board would be huge.
 
Team Penske said:
I thought they already made all the parts and pieces Nascar supplies as mandatory.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine how things would explode internationally for Nascar if the could get a foothold in China? Nobody in the US wants a Buick but they sell like hot cakes in China.
 
IanMcVittie said:
Can you imagine how things would explode internationally for Nascar if the could get a foothold in China? Nobody in the US wants a Buick but they sell like hot cakes in China.
Click to expand...

I have been a Buick man all my life. Buick has been the best Pontiac just as Oldsmobile was the better Chevrolet.
 
MikeInIllinois said:
As for demographics, I don't look that deep into it. Through my media sales experience, I've found there's a desired market for every demographic.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the insight, very interesting, especially coming from a media insider. I mean, all subscribers of a cable network, regardless of demographics, contribute value via carriage fees. That is an important revenue stream, paid per subscriber. But the insight you add regarding the advertising value is good stuff, so thanks for posting it.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Thanks for the insight, very interesting, especially coming from a media insider. I mean, all subscribers of a cable network, regardless of demographics, contribute value via carriage fees. That is an important revenue stream, paid per subscriber. But the insight you add regarding the advertising value is good stuff, so thanks for posting it.
Click to expand...

As long as the cable/sat/streaming services jam programming down your throat things should be ok. I know I wouldn’t subscribe to FS1, NBCS or ESPN if I didn’t have to as they don’t have any value to me.

As far as demographics go I have more discretionary income and time than at any point in my life. I would think that someone other than retirement homes or funeral homes would want to pry some shekels out of me.

While I have become loyal to certain products and services I am still open minded and there are always new products and services to consider. IDK exactly why a 25 year old with a buck fifty’s worth of student debt is better to market to but apparently he is. Maybe things will change with us aging boomers.
 
For the sake of perspective this race had a 4.5 rating and 7.3 million viewers in 2014 and was broadcast on FOX in mid March. I’m guessing it probably had 100k plus in attendance.
 
IanMcVittie said:
For the sake of perspective this race had a 4.5 rating and 7.3 million viewers in 2014 and was broadcast on FOX in mid March. I’m guessing it probably had 100k plus in attendance.
Click to expand...

Everyone has FOX, everyone doesn't have FS1. Numbers from FSGO and other outlets have not been completed yet, but there has been an increase from last year's event. Still impressive it raked in 1.5 after the Sunday race being rained out. Not a bad job here, still showing slight increases every week.
 
Last edited:
Kiante said:
Everyone has FOX, everyone doesn't have FS1. Numbers from FSGO and other outlets have not been completed yet, but there has been an increase from last year's event. Still impressive it raked in 1.5 after the Sunday race being rained out. Not a bad job here, still showing slight increases every week.
Click to expand...

Due to a number of factors I don’t think this year’s race can be compared accurately. to other recent Bristol spring races. Some people will see less than 3 million fans watching a race at Bristol as good and others bad.
 
Here's an uncomfortable reality that may be worthy of discussion, rather than the same old "wHY aRe THE rATiNgZ DowN aGAin?"

A vocal segment of fans and media have prevailed in pushing the need for more short tracks and road courses to fix the staid schedule. If you consume NASCAR media, you likely hear this refrain every day. I happen to personally agree with it, as I would welcome more of both. However, NASCAR's existing short tracks and road courses do not attract larger audiences than intermediates, and in fact have just drawn the two smallest audiences of the season. Part of this is being sequestered to FS1 rather than Fox, but when looking back through recent years, Bristol, Martinsville, and Richmond do not draw higher TV ratings than places like Kansas, Chicago, and Pocono. Neither do Sonoma and Watkins Glen. If the current ones aren't more popular, why would new unestablished ones be?

I point this out not to argue against a more varied schedule, but to suggest that people shouldn't confuse their personal preferences and concepts of "good racing" with what actually draws the masses, if that's the goal.
 
gnomesayin said:
Here's an uncomfortable reality that may be worthy of discussion, rather than the same old "wHY aRe THE rATiNgZ DowN aGAin?"

A vocal segment of fans and media have prevailed in pushing the need for more short tracks and road courses to fix the staid schedule. If you consume NASCAR media, you likely hear this refrain every day. I happen to personally agree with it, as I would welcome more of both. However, NASCAR's existing short tracks and road courses do not attract larger audiences than intermediates, and in fact have just drawn the two smallest audiences of the season. Part of this is being sequestered to FS1 rather than Fox, but when looking back through recent years, Bristol, Martinsville, and Richmond do not draw higher TV ratings than places like Kansas, Chicago, and Pocono. Neither do Sonoma and Watkins Glen. If the current ones aren't more popular, why would new unestablished ones be?

I point this out not to argue against a more varied schedule, but to suggest that people shouldn't confuse their personal preferences and concepts of "good racing" with what actually draws the masses, if that's the goal.
Click to expand...

I think you hit on the head in an earlier post when you said something like it didn’t matter what Nascar did the hordes weren’t returning.

I am not plugged into any Nascar media so I didn’t realize there was a hue and cry for short tracks and road courses. I thought it was more of a RF thing. Based on attendance and ratings Nascar would be better off holding more races like Daytona and Talladega as people show up in the stands and at home for them.

Personally I wouldn’t mind if Nascar never raced on a track over a mile long but that is just my preference. IDK what basis the media and others are using to rally for more short tracks and RC’s but I hope it works.
 
gnomesayin said:
Here's an uncomfortable reality that may be worthy of discussion, rather than the same old "wHY aRe THE rATiNgZ DowN aGAin?"

A vocal segment of fans and media have prevailed in pushing the need for more short tracks and road courses to fix the staid schedule. If you consume NASCAR media, you likely hear this refrain every day. I happen to personally agree with it, as I would welcome more of both. However, NASCAR's existing short tracks and road courses do not attract larger audiences than intermediates, and in fact have just drawn the two smallest audiences of the season. Part of this is being sequestered to FS1 rather than Fox, but when looking back through recent years, Bristol, Martinsville, and Richmond do not draw higher TV ratings than places like Kansas, Chicago, and Pocono. Neither do Sonoma and Watkins Glen. If the current ones aren't more popular, why would new unestablished ones be?

I point this out not to argue against a more varied schedule, but to suggest that people shouldn't confuse their personal preferences and concepts of "good racing" with what actually draws the masses, if that's the goal.
Click to expand...
Yeah, what you say is the dirty little secret of the #MoreShortTracks mantra... the evidence does not support that TV ratings or live attendance would benefit. I do believe the Charlotte Roval live gate and TV numbers were better than the fall Charlotte 1.5er would have done, at least for the first year.

I support schedule diversity for Nascar racing. IMO, six short tracks is about right, and I'd like to see about six road courses as well. I also believe the 'heart and soul' of Nascar racing is the fast intermediates... 1.5ers and 2.0/2.5ers (without pack racing rules attempts, please). Pack racing should be Daytona and Talladega only, IMO.
 
gnomesayin said:
A vocal segment of fans and media have prevailed in pushing the need for more short tracks and road courses to fix the staid schedule. If you consume NASCAR media, you likely hear this refrain every day. I happen to personally agree with it, as I would welcome more of both. However, NASCAR's existing short tracks and road courses do not attract larger audiences than intermediates, and in fact have just drawn the two smallest audiences of the season. Part of this is being sequestered to FS1 rather than Fox, but when looking back through recent years, Bristol, Martinsville, and Richmond do not draw higher TV ratings than places like Kansas, Chicago, and Pocono. Neither do Sonoma and Watkins Glen. If the current ones aren't more popular, why would new unestablished ones be
Click to expand...

Martinsville has not had a single race broadcast on network television since 2014, and I can tell you for a fact that this has pissed the track off. Plus, Martinsville was also postponed due to snow last year.

How many times has the Bristol spring race been postponed in the last five or six years now? And I remember the night race was postponed a couple years ago and moved to CNBC.

Saturday night races, which is what Richmond's races are, do not draw a television audience. This has been proven time and time again. And it's sketchy to call Richmond a short track anyway - sure it's small, but it's designed to race like a 1.5-mile track and the on-track racing reflects that.

And Bristol's ratings and attendance have also suffered ever since the track was reconfigured to race like a 1.5-mile track.

Since Jayski no longer exists, I can't pull up the ratings page, but how does Sonoma rate compared to Michigan under the Fox deal? It's been well over a decade since Sonoma's been on network television. But to bring road courses up, wasn't the Charlotte Roval race on NBC a ratings hit last year?
 
LewTheShoe said:
Yeah, what you say is the dirty little secret of the #MoreShortTracks mantra... the evidence does not support that TV ratings or live attendance would benefit. I do believe the Charlotte Roval live gate and TV numbers were better than the fall Charlotte 1.5er would have done, at least for the first year.

I support schedule diversity for Nascar racing. IMO, six short tracks is about right, and I'd like to see about six road courses as well. I also believe the 'heart and soul' of Nascar racing is the fast intermediates... 1.5ers and 2.0/2.5ers (without pack racing rules attempts, please). Pack racing should be Daytona and Talladega only, IMO.
Click to expand...

I think the heart and soul is short track racing. That's where the sport was born and that's where careers are born. And again, it's worth noting that Martinsville hasn't been on broadcast TV since 2014.

While I wouldn't call them short tracks, I'd like to see Rockingham and Iowa on the schedule. Nashville Fairgrounds too but it looks like the city has successfully sabotage the deal to bring NASCAR racing back there which is a shame.
 
Andy, to be clear, I support more short tracks and road courses on the schedule. I just don't expect them to necessarily attract bigger TV audiences than the widely criticized intermediates.

If NASCAR is serious about embracing short track roots, I would agree that they need to get these races on network TV. That matters much more than this "cutoff race" schedule shuffling business.

The first year ratings bump for the Charlotte Roval was a success, and implies a certain fatigue with too many conventional 1.5 mile races. However, there are no recent ratings for a short track that demonstrate higher demand for them, aside from maybe at the Trucks level with Eldora usually posting a high number for that series.

Actually, looking over 2018 ratings, Watkins Glen posted an audience of 3.67 million on NBC that is plainly larger than the races around it on the schedule, demonstrating mass appeal there.
 
gnomesayin said:
Andy, to be clear, I support more short tracks and road courses on the schedule. I just don't expect them to necessarily attract bigger TV audiences than the widely criticized intermediates.

If NASCAR is serious about embracing short track roots, I would agree that they need to get these races on network TV. That matters much more than this "cutoff race" schedule shuffling business.

The first year ratings bump for the Charlotte Roval was a success, and implies a certain fatigue with too many conventional 1.5 mile races. However, there are no recent ratings for a short track that demonstrate higher demand for them, aside from maybe at the Trucks level with Eldora usually posting a high number for that series.

Actually, looking over 2018 ratings, Watkins Glen posted an audience of 3.67 million on NBC that is plainly larger than the races around it on the schedule, demonstrating mass appeal there.
Click to expand...

NASCAR is a niche sport again, predominantly in the Southeast. NASCAR should embrace that. Short tracks may not bring in an influx of new viewers, but it does satisfy the current fanbase.

Instead, they're trying to make the west coast the epicenter of the sport ... again. Last time they tried this, they didn't bring new fans in. Instead, they pissed off their core fans.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
NASCAR is a niche sport again, predominantly in the Southeast. NASCAR should embrace that. Short tracks may not bring in an influx of new viewers, but it does satisfy the current fanbase.

Instead, they're trying to make the west coast the epicenter of the sport ... again. Last time they tried this, they didn't bring new fans in. Instead, they pissed off their core fans.
Click to expand...

I really loved Nascar when it was a regional sport. Let’s get 2 dates at Rockingham, keep both Martinsville and Bristol dates, put Richmond back like it was and add another 3 short track courses in the south east. While we’re at it let’s put Atlanta back like it was and give Darlington back a second date. That would be about 15 good races!

Before anyone takes issue I fully realize this won’t happen.
 
Actually, while TV viewership is and will always be most concentrated in the South and parts of the Midwest (Indianapolis, Tulsa, etc.), many of the remaining traditional southern tracks are struggling with attendance every bit as much as anywhere else, as we saw yesterday. There is nothing in the data to suggest that restoring more races to that region would reverse these trends.

If the west coast centric criticism is about Phoenix becoming the finale, I agree it's an odd choice, and perhaps more wishful thinking
 
Last edited:
gnomesayin said:
Here's an uncomfortable reality that may be worthy of discussion, rather than the same old "wHY aRe THE rATiNgZ DowN aGAin?"

A vocal segment of fans and media have prevailed in pushing the need for more short tracks and road courses to fix the staid schedule. If you consume NASCAR media, you likely hear this refrain every day. I happen to personally agree with it, as I would welcome more of both. However, NASCAR's existing short tracks and road courses do not attract larger audiences than intermediates, and in fact have just drawn the two smallest audiences of the season. Part of this is being sequestered to FS1 rather than Fox, but when looking back through recent years, Bristol, Martinsville, and Richmond do not draw higher TV ratings than places like Kansas, Chicago, and Pocono. Neither do Sonoma and Watkins Glen. If the current ones aren't more popular, why would new unestablished ones be?

I point this out not to argue against a more varied schedule, but to suggest that people shouldn't confuse their personal preferences and concepts of "good racing" with what actually draws the masses, if that's the goal.
Click to expand...
Andrew Maness did some research that came to the same conclusions - short tracks and road courses, while good and fun, don't appeal anymore for TV ratings than any other type of track. I think they may even have rated slightly lower, and this was done ceteris paribus. Things may have changed a little bit as it was done in 2013 or 2014 but probably not enough to make a real difference.

I do agree with Andy, though, that short tracks in particular would appease the weekly fan more even if the national following isn't there. And Martinsville never being on broadcast TV anymore is a big whiff.
 
I’ve always contended that ratings decline is predominantly due to multiple factors: the fading of car culture, the far larger number of choices people have for viewing/playing, the placement of too many broadcasts on cable channels versus networks, and the many changes in NASCAR relative to rules and driver retirements.

Viewership stabilization is a good sign, if it holds. Networks love sports but won’t overpay for the next contract. I do believe more variety of tracks can help stir greater interest. Attendance at tracks for new c events should be strong. I’d love to see racing return to Rockingham, and get sanctioned at Gateway (St. Louis market) and Nashville, plus other short tracks. I like road courses but not sure that moves the needle like Roval adaptations might.
 
I think the Roval they have at Charlotte needs a genuine bus stop. I think they need to put their toe in the water slowly by adding a short track, and a road course and see how it goes. Nascar hasn't been falling all over themselves catering to every fans whim, but continue to show decent profits in spite of leaner times. Under new management, Nascar continues to get leaner while expanding into the lower series and widening their influence and fan base world wide. The shake up in the schedule is the first example of their work and I think they did a brilliant job with what they had to work with. They are on schedule 2021 with the new car and it is going to be a cost cutter with many standardized parts, engines to follow. Now I am pretty sure a deathbedder will be here soon to tell me Nascar is dying whatever that means but I am and will always be on the other end of that stinky mess of lies and half truths. Other X fans can casually drop away or age out, some loose their enthusiasm for the sport, some can cry or bleed all over the pages every day. Good riddance, enjoy your other pursuits. Come back if you get bored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom