Owners to NASCAR: Pick up the pace

Mid week in the summer might work on a short track, put some regional Modifieds and Late models on the ticket. Keep the Cup race no longer than 300 laps and keep ticket prices reasonable. ..I'd pay to watch it in person.
 
Mopardh9 said:
Mid week in the summer might work on a short track, put some regional Modifieds and Late models on the ticket. Keep the Cup race no longer than 300 laps and keep ticket prices reasonable. ..I'd pay to watch it in person.
Click to expand...

That's always what I'd like to see on the racing card. Put mods on-track at New Hampshire then run the Cup race. Or late models at Martinsville, Richmond, or Bristol then let the Cup guys go out.
 
jws926 said:
They have lights for the horse track, but not as many that would take to light the entire track, very interesting about the AFB being the reason, or could be .
Click to expand...

What Air Force base is next to Talladega? There is an airport there, perhaps with an Air Natl Guard unit there, but how much flying do they actually do?
 
KTMLew01 said:
Names please. No hi
Click to expand...

It IS possible that Kaufman and Murstein were sent out by the rest to float the trial ballon since the fans generally don't care about them or their teams, but when I hear Roger, Rick, Joe and Richard Speak in these terms, THEN I will sit up and take notice. Otherwise, no.
 
Formerjackman said:
... when I hear Roger, Rick, Joe and Richard Speak in these terms, THEN I will sit up and take notice. .
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Murstein's taxi medallion financing cash cows are all near death. They haven't produced any milk for 2 years and he's figured out that it costs a lot of money to go fast on the weekends.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Friday’s another TV black hole.
Click to expand...

Yep. When networks want to cancel TV shows that otherwise get decent ratings, they move them to Friday nights.

And Saturday night races get consistently awful ratings.

Sunday night races, on the other hand, would do fine. Monday night races, as proven with the 2012 Daytona 500, will do fine, even though Mondays have since become a blockbuster night for TV (DWTS, American Idol, The Voice, American Ninja Warrior, MNF, Supergirl - all flagship programs on their respective networks)
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
Yep. When networks want to cancel TV shows that otherwise get decent ratings, they move them to Friday nights.

And Saturday night races get consistently awful ratings.

Sunday night races, on the other hand, would do fine. Monday night races, as proven with the 2012 Daytona 500, will do fine, even though Mondays have since become a blockbuster night for TV (DWTS, American Idol, The Voice, American Ninja Warrior, MNF, Supergirl - all flagship programs on their respective networks)
Click to expand...
lol @ Supergirl being slipped in there. :D
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
Yep. When networks want to cancel TV shows that otherwise get decent ratings, they move them to Friday nights.

And Saturday night races get consistently awful ratings.

Sunday night races, on the other hand, would do fine. Monday night races, as proven with the 2012 Daytona 500, will do fine, even though Mondays have since become a blockbuster night for TV (DWTS, American Idol, The Voice, American Ninja Warrior, MNF, Supergirl - all flagship programs on their respective networks)
Click to expand...
You missed Antiques Roadshow ;)
 
Adam Stern said:
The issues causing frustration include cost controls, the feeling from some that NASCAR needs to run fewer or shorter races and do so at different venues, questions about NASCAR’s long-term management plan, and a perceived lack of cohesiveness over new initiatives.
Click to expand...
Just about every recent article about Nascar being for sale has speculated that a new owner might run shorter races and fewer of them, as a way to improve Nascar and increase its value. What do y'all think of fewer or shorter races... from a business perspective?

1. At 38 races, Nascar has the longest season of any sport. Most other forms of racing are barely half as many races, with frequent gaps of a week or two between events. Personally, I like having a race every week, and like having a 9-month season. What would be gained by having fewer races... free up TV slots for stuff like cornhole tournaments or more college baseball? How would that increase the value of Nascar?

2. Nascar races generally have a TV time slot of 3.5 or 4.0 hours, and sometimes go longer than scheduled. Nascar is just about the last sport around that still schedules the national anthem in the race slot, not during the pre-race show. Is that good or bad for business? I say it's good, just my preference, but no opinion on the business value. But regardless of that, most other racing I watch is shorter than Nascar. Would Nascar be more attractive to TV and to live attendance if it were 2.5 hours instead of 3.5?

3. If shorter races are the way to go, should the support race(s) be on the same day as part of the same ticket? That would be outside the box... and some think Nascar needs to get outside the box.

4. How many tracks could convert two average races into one dynamite event... like Darlington has done, like Fontana has done?
 
Last edited:
LewTheShoe said:
Just about every recent article about Nascar being for sale has speculated that a new owner might run shorter races and fewer of them, as a way to improve Nascar and increase its value. What do y'all think of this as a business move?

1. At 38 races, Nascar has the longest season of any sport. Most other forms of racing are barely half as many races, with frequent gaps of a week or two between events. Personally, I like having a race every week, and like having a 9-month season. What would be gained by having fewer races... free up TV slots for stuff like cornhole tournaments or more college baseball? How would that increase the value of Nascar?

2. Nascar races generally have a TV time slot of 3.5 or 4.0 hours, and sometimes go longer than scheduled. Nascar is just about the last sport around that still schedules the national anthem in the race slot, not during the pre-race show. Is that good or bad for business? I say it's good, just my preference, but no opinion on the business value. But regardless of that, most other racing I watch is shorter than Nascar. Would Nascar be more attractive to TV and to live attendance if it were 2.5 hours instead of 3.5?

3. If shorter races are the way to go, should the support race(s) be on the same day as part of the same ticket? That would be outside the box... and some think Nascar needs to get outside the box.
Click to expand...
Good conversation points. I really dont want shorter races, I hate how we now have to cater to people's short attention spans. I would actually go with maybe a 28-32 race schedule though with Daytona, Martinsville, Richmond, Michigan ( this will point will probably get destroyed but I enjoy the racing here, never bored when the circuit stops here) , Talladega, Bristol, Charlotte and Darlington ( I love the racing there, its my favorite track and I wish the place had its spring race before fall's Southern 500 date. ) as the only places with two races on the calendar. The rest of the tracks get one race each, hopefully this frees up the schedule a bit and allows for some breathing room
 
I would not invest the time/money to attend shorter races. My shortest round trip to a track near me is 514 miles. When I go to a race, it's an investment. It's normally a vacation destination for my wife and I. Less of the product makes it far less likely that I'd ever attend.

Towing my 5er - 10mpg @ $3.69gal/diesel
Camping $20-$30/night
Tickets $??.?? - $???.??
Food/Drink - $0.00 - I'd be eating and drinking at home to. It's a wash.
 
Wouldn't surprise me if they tried to cut some of the bull****, and get the playoffs to begin before football season begins, and get people hooked before the national sports talk shifts elsewhere. I don't think we need so many races to figure who sucks and who doesn't anyways. It's like the waning days of baseball/basketball/hockey seasons. After a certain point you know who the contenders and pretenders are and viewer fatigue hits a peak, and you're just sitting there waiting for the real season to begin.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
I would not invest the time/money to attend shorter races. My shortest round trip to a track near me is 514 miles. When I go to a race, it's an investment. It's normally a vacation destination for my wife and I. Less of the product makes it far less likely that I'd ever attend.

Towing my 5er - 10mpg @ $3.69gal/diesel
Camping $20-$30/night
Tickets $??.?? - $???.??
Food/Drink - $0.00 - I'd be eating and drinking at home to. It's a wash.
Click to expand...
My line of thinking right here
 
LewTheShoe said:
Just about every recent article about Nascar being for sale has speculated that a new owner might run shorter races and fewer of them, as a way to improve Nascar and increase its value. What do y'all think of fewer or shorter races... from a business perspective?

1. At 38 races, Nascar has the longest season of any sport. Most other forms of racing are barely half as many races, with frequent gaps of a week or two between events. Personally, I like having a race every week, and like having a 9-month season. What would be gained by having fewer races... free up TV slots for stuff like cornhole tournaments or more college baseball? How would that increase the value of Nascar?

2. Nascar races generally have a TV time slot of 3.5 or 4.0 hours, and sometimes go longer than scheduled. Nascar is just about the last sport around that still schedules the national anthem in the race slot, not during the pre-race show. Is that good or bad for business? I say it's good, just my preference, but no opinion on the business value. But regardless of that, most other racing I watch is shorter than Nascar. Would Nascar be more attractive to TV and to live attendance if it were 2.5 hours instead of 3.5?

3. If shorter races are the way to go, should the support race(s) be on the same day as part of the same ticket? That would be outside the box... and some think Nascar needs to get outside the box.

4. How many tracks could convert two average races into one dynamite event... like Darlington has done, like Fontana has done?
Click to expand...
Great questions. My first thought is race every week for five hours. I love NASCAR racing. But I also love college football. One of the great things about college football is the anticipation. As soon as the last game is played I am already looking forward to the next season. So I think from a business perspective you need to manage your supply. Maybe cut back on the number of races. And, if you do that shorten the season. Don't take weeks off. I want to see racing every week when it is in season, just like football. I like Indy car, but crap I have to check the schedule consistently to see when they are racing and it is not unusual for me to miss a race, which I don't like to do.

That got me thinking, what if the Cup guys only ran 15 - 20 races? Would that spike the interest?
 
Last edited:
Well since we have the "Chase" and stage racing, why not shake things up again? Make the Daytona 500 the first "Chase" race, then after that make every fourth race count as a "Chase" race. That way the storyline is chatted up all through the season, and every fourth race has a spotlight on it. May sound goofy, just thinking out loud.
 
mack said:
Well since we have the "Chase" and stage racing, why not shake things up again? Make the Daytona 500 the first "Chase" race, then after that make every fourth race count as a "Chase" race. That way the storyline is chatted up all through the season, and every fourth race has a spotlight on it. May sound goofy, just thinking out loud.
Click to expand...
36 race long chase. Most points wins.
 
Larsonfan1995 said:
36 race long chase. Most points wins.
Click to expand...
good idea, get the jump on stick n ball, their playoffs are about half a regular season. :rolleyes: Chase this, chase that, for the whole season Current chase leader Kevin Harvick, followed closely by Kyle Busch. Will Logano in third pull ahead with only 20 races to go? works for me
 
FLRacingFan said:
I don't think we need so many races to figure who sucks and who doesn't anyways. It's like the waning days of baseball/basketball/hockey seasons. After a certain point you know who the contenders and pretenders are and viewer fatigue hits a peak, and you're just sitting there waiting for the real season to begin.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. I could read your comment as saying, there is no reason to race except to determine the champion. What about the other reasons to race... like it is really fun and exciting... and like racing makes money and more money is better than less money. I believe the media's narrow-minded focus on the season championship is unfortunate and detrimental to Nascar *and* its fans.

Let's say you chop 6 or 8 or 10 races out of the schedule. That would allow some modest cost reductions by everyone, but surely the revenue cuts would be larger than the cost cuts, I'd think. Unless the remaining races were somehow enhanced by being more scarce. Does a race at Pocono become more compelling just because next week's race at Michigan has been cancelled (and replaced on TV by bowling or cornhole)?
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
Yep. When networks want to cancel TV shows that otherwise get decent ratings, they move them to Friday nights.
Click to expand...
For the most part that is true, but a few shows are doing good rating wise being on that Friday primetime slot, this last Friday, H50 pulled a .8 /4 at 7.9 million viewers , Blue Bloods pulled in a .9/4 and 8.88 million viewers.

They kicked the sh*t out of all the other shows that night.
 
The amount of races is fine how it is, and the race lengths are fine how they are.

I hate any change that's made just for the sake of change, especially when it's not well thought out. That's why we have had the Chase/Playoffs and 10 different variations of it in 15 years.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Hmmm. I could read your comment as saying, there is no reason to race except to determine the champion. What about the other reasons to race... like it is really fun and exciting... and like racing makes money and more money is better than less money. I believe the media's narrow-minded focus on the season championship is unfortunate and detrimental to Nascar *and* its fans.

Let's say you chop 6 or 8 or 10 races out of the schedule. That would allow some modest cost reductions by everyone, but surely the revenue cuts would be larger than the cost cuts, I'd think. Unless the remaining races were somehow enhanced by being more scarce. Does a race at Pocono become more compelling just because next week's race at Michigan has been cancelled (and replaced on TV by bowling or cornhole)?
Click to expand...
I agree, but they've made it that way. I remember when Jr. last won the Daytona 500, 2014, one of the things he said immediately after in Victory Lane was that he was locked into the Chase and wouldn't have to worry all season. Individual races used to be more of an event but a lot of them just seemed to be viewed as playoff qualifiers now.

Besides, any potential buyer would likely have increasing average viewership as a priority (especially if it were Comcast) and moving some events away from the single biggest TV juggernaut (the NFL) in the country is the easiest way to do that. Whether that be through running midweek races in fall, both midweek and weekend races within reasonable distances in the summer, or just cutting a handful of races, I don't know. And it is possible that whoever buys would not be so beholden to ISC and SMI.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Besides, any potential buyer would likely have increasing average viewership as a priority (especially if it were Comcast) and moving some events away from the single biggest TV juggernaut (the NFL) in the country is the easiest way to do that.
Click to expand...
I'm no TV expert, but I don't see "average viewership" as a be-all, end-all metric of success. What is Comcast going to broadcast in the fall to replace Nascar, which is usually the #1 non-football show in those Sunday time slots? Does it make sense to race through the wet and cold spring, while turning over the beautiful fall weekends to IndyCar or other racing series that would love to fill the gap?

As the owner of a TV property, if my 36 races are worth $820 million per year, I'm doubtful that my best 26-28 races are worth more than $820 million. My best 26-28 races would have the best "average" but what pays the mortgage is "total dollars." Just my opinion.
 
Media is the greatest downfall of Nascar. These people are so lazy they hear the first story of the week and the next 50 stories are just the regurgitation of the same information. There are 36 cars on track owned by more than 10 teams. There is a lot of interesting information out there just not enough professional reporters and producers to get these stories out to the public.
Nascar's second greatest dilemma is to find producers that actually care about the content and production of the race.
 
LewTheShoe said:
I'm no TV expert, but I don't see "average viewership" as a be-all, end-all metric of success. What is Comcast going to broadcast in the fall to replace Nascar, which is usually the #1 non-football show in those Sunday time slots? Does it make sense to race through the wet and cold spring, while turning over the beautiful fall weekends to IndyCar or other racing series that would love to fill the gap?

As the owner of a TV property, if my 36 races are worth $820 million per year, I'm doubtful that my best 26-28 races are worth more than $820 million. My best 26-28 races would have the best "average" but what pays the mortgage is "total dollars." Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Some playoff races might dip below a 1.0 rating this fall, if trends hold into the fall. With as much as they're paying, they might want something a little higher to generate more subscription revenue for NBCSN. Conditions have changed a lot since that deal was signed in 2013.

8-10 races is extreme. I don't think it would be more than a small handful, with some others changing to midweek events. That every single playoff race competes against football is a big detriment. Even just comparing the late summer/early fall races to the races during football season it's about a 30-35% impact. You could maximize interest with doing some summer doubleheaders (like in Brad's dream schedule) without really having to cut a whole lot out.
 
Unfortunately only die hard NASCAR fans tune in to watch the full race anymore.Unlike football where you have 2 or 3 announcers,a typical NASCAR race has 6 or more vying for TV time.It has really been painful to watch this season as more action seems to be missed than ever before.I have very little confidence a media company buying NASCAR and changing this.
 
LewTheShoe said:
What do y'all think of fewer or shorter races... from a business perspective?
Click to expand...
That depends on who's part of the business we look at - teams, NASCAR, tracks, or TV?
The teams would probably prefer fewer, shorter races. That requires less resources on their part, although they'll probably have to settle for sponsor contracts that involve less money.
NASCAR and the tracks will object to anything bringing in less money.
The networks don't appear to have trouble finding content to broadcast. They'll factor the length and number of races into their next contract.
For what it's worth, I've long felt the prayer and anthem belong as part of the pre-race broadcast. When I turn on a race, I want to see the race start, not 18 minutes of screwing around. That's a great way to lose the casual fan who may be tuning in. Save the elaborate displays for the D500 and I500 only.
DIDIT said:
I want to see racing every week when it is in season, just like football.
Click to expand...
Football has enough teams that the schedule can have games every week but still permit individual teams to have 'bye' weekends. NASCAR doesn't currently have that luxury; the Chase requirement to run every race prevents it.
For the most part, football games go on regardless of the weather. Auto racing needs a couple of open weekends on the chance they'll need make-up dates.
More reasons comparisons to stick-and-ball sports don't work very well.
LewTheShoe said:
As the owner of a TV property, if my 36 races are worth $820 million per year, I'm doubtful that my best 26-28 races are worth more than $820 million.
Click to expand...
As a buyer of TV properties, if I can get 26 to 28 weekends for $640 million and fill the other weekends with content that may draw lower ratings but costs way less than $22 million per weekend, a change may look darned attractive.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Wouldn't surprise me if they tried to cut some of the bull****, and get the playoffs to begin before football season begins, and get people hooked before the national sports talk shifts elsewhere. I don't think we need so many races to figure who sucks and who doesn't anyways. It's like the waning days of baseball/basketball/hockey seasons. After a certain point you know who the contenders and pretenders are and viewer fatigue hits a peak, and you're just sitting there waiting for the real season to begin.
Click to expand...
NASCAR is the only sport I can think of who's TV ratings are actually worse during their playoffs than they are in their regular season. They could do a 28 race season (21 regular season and a 7 race, 12 driver playoff), wrap up around Labor Day, and have July and August pretty much to themselves as far as playoff sports. They'd have to go up against the Summer Olympics and World Cup every other year, but it probably still wouldn't be as bad as trying to compete with the start of football season and the MLB playoffs.
 
darlingtonfan said:
Unfortunately only die hard NASCAR fans tune in to watch the full race anymore.Unlike football where you have 2 or 3 announcers,a typical NASCAR race has 6 or more vying for TV time.It has really been painful to watch this season as more action seems to be missed than ever before.I have very little confidence a media company buying NASCAR and changing this.
Click to expand...
Does anyone not a die-hard fan watch any sport all the way through?

I'm with you on the overload of announcers. I've been against the infield 'hosts' from the beginning. Three in the booth and three on pit road is plenty. I don't need any of them making winner predictions in the middle of the race; that's pre-race content.
 
I agree 100% on announcer overload. In an era of declining viewership, I am shocked as hell that the networks haven't dialed this back quite a bit to reduce costs. There are just too many people who have to have their paycheck justified by getting on screen time at the expensive of what's important. If you REALLY want to think outside the box, other than the pit reporters, why do ANY of the on screen talent need to be at the track? That model has worked for F1 racing and the broadcast of the 24 Hours of LeMans.
 
Formerjackman said:
... why do ANY of the on screen talent need to be at the track?
Click to expand...
In the case of NASCAR coverage, the booth announcers are needed to tell us when there's a change in position or an accident, since the production crew apparently needs several seconds to catch up and switch to a camera that's focused on what's happening. They're also needed to describe the replay of what they saw while the rest of us were watch another tech explanation.
 
4tires17gals said:
restrictor plates at all tracks is better than no sport at all
Click to expand...
tumblr_mrdy178jeZ1rlfsw2o1_250.gif
 
the sport is expensive as a NASCAR needs fuel and tires. However, in soccer only a $12 ball is needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom