The Chase and television ratings

dpkimmel2001

dpkimmel2001

Team Owner
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
36,180
Points
1,033
Location
Western PA
Sometimes a picture speaks volumes.

A8PlL4vCEAA7cZ5.gif:large

Average U.S. Ratings for the Chase
 
I'm going to call it the Johnson effect, notice it goes down in the 5 years JJ won the cup spikes up in 2011 when he is not in contention and then back down when he had a shot this year.
 
sloggie said:
18-49 year olds watching TV wehen from 25.7 milion to 25 million in two years? That's not really that much of a drop.
Click to expand...

No it's not a significant drop at all... not even close to NASCAR's decline. It's yet ANOTHER excuse for the fact that a crappy product isn't bringing in a new generation of fans.
 
sloggie said:
18-49 year olds watching TV wehen from 25.7 milion to 25 million in two years? That's not really that much of a drop.
Click to expand...

Just another hit to the demographic they are aiming for, a demographic that isn't growing or expected to grow the next few years. Show biz is rough.
 
FenderBumper said:
I think it's more about the personality slowly draining out of the series after Sr passed, the zero personality CoT and it's pristine aero dependence and tire spears, corporate driver formula and nascar infatuation with 200 mph speeds.
Click to expand...

I agree , there is absolutely no proof that there is any relationship between the ratings and the chase. It could be argued in fact , that they would have been much worse without the chase . There just isn't proof either way.
 
What do the ratings look like during these same years for the races BEFORE the Chase? If they show a similar trend, then the problem is with NASCAR and isn't the Chase itself.

The steepest declines occurred when the final races were moved to ESPN, a cable network. Maybe their coverage is more of a factor than the format, or maybe there are still plenty of people without cable or satellite.

The next-steepest drop was after the move to ABC. I suspect both this drop and the ESPN one may have been influenced by the increased number of commercials necessary for these networks to pay for their contracts.

Just random thoughts, but statistics presented in isolation are rarely useful.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
What do the ratings look like during these same years for the races BEFORE the Chase? If they show a similar trend, then the problem is with NASCAR and isn't the Chase itself.

The steepest declines occurred when the final races were moved to ESPN, a cable network. Maybe their coverage is more of a factor than the format, or maybe there are still plenty of people without cable or satellite.

The next-steepest drop was after the move to ABC. I suspect both this drop and the ESPN one may have been influenced by the increased number of commercials necessary for these networks to pay for their contracts.

Just random thoughts, but statistics presented in isolation are rarely useful.
Click to expand...

One further random thought . If these declines were solely due to Nascar and it's management ,why would competing networks bid the price even higher for next year ?
 
I think it's just a general declining interest and lack of rivalries that are to blame for declining ratings not to mention the proliferation of other content. Some people will never stop whining about the Chase but ratings were declining before its inception. Perhaps the Chase prevented even steeper declines. But as far as the big picture, NASCAR is still very healthy and profitable.
 
Bottom line is that the ratings are declining. Someone should be worried. It doesn't take the ratings to make one realize, just look at the empty stands.
 
ted@economy said:
One further random thought . If these declines were solely due to Nascar and it's management ,why would competing networks bid the price even higher for next year ?
Click to expand...

Content for Programming. The Networks are desperate for content, even with fewer viewers, and they are willing to pay out the nose for it.
 
There simply isn't nearly as much interest in NASCAR anymore for multiple reasons mentioned in this thread already. Furthermore I believe (although perhaps someone here can provide the stats) that people are simply less interested in motorsports in general.

NASCAR's popularity peak has come and gone. Unless there is a dramatic change in the product, I hardly doubt the decline will stop.
 
sloggie said:
Content for Programming. The Networks are desperate for content, even with fewer viewers, and they are willing to pay out the nose for it.
Click to expand...
The problem is that the networks are paying so much for the programming that they have to sell more commercials to pay for it. More commericals in a broadcast leads to less racing, which is one thing that leads to fewer viewers.
 
paradigm said:
There simply isn't nearly as much interest in NASCAR anymore for multiple reasons mentioned in this thread already. Furthermore I believe (although perhaps someone here can provide the stats) that people are simply less interested in motorsports in general.

NASCAR's popularity peak has come and gone. Unless there is a dramatic change in the product, I hardly doubt the decline will stop.
Click to expand...
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2012/01/26/Research-and-Ratings/Harris-Poll.aspx

From January this year. Over 2000 polled, and 8% said motorsports were their favorites. That comes in fourth, behind only pro football, baseball (both pro and college combined?) and college football. Note this records what people say are their favorites, not butts in the seats. It also doesn't break racing down by types of vehicles. Sprint Cup may not be as popular, but remember all those local tracks.
 
If you think those ratings are bad... how bad they would be if there was no chase?:D

I'd like to see the ratings before Jeff Gordon came into the sport.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2012/01/26/Research-and-Ratings/Harris-Poll.aspx

From January this year. Over 2000 polled, and 8% said motorsports were their favorites. That comes in fourth, behind only pro football, baseball (both pro and college combined?) and college football. Note this records what people say are their favorites, not butts in the seats. It also doesn't break racing down by types of vehicles. Sprint Cup may not be as popular, but remember all those local tracks.
Click to expand...
I noticed the poll was motorsports...there are a hellava lot of different motor sports...That's like asking do you like sports that use a ball.....
 
Seems every year that JJ has won or been in contention to win the ratings have sank lower, Maybe if Nascar would do like WWO and give their drivers personalities the ratings would improve.
 
dirtguru said:
Maybe if Nascar would do like WWO and give their drivers personalities the ratings would improve.
Click to expand...
These guys have personalities; the marketing departments won't let them show it. It's not NASCAR that needed to say, 'Boys, have at it' on the track; it's the sponsors that need to let them loose off the track.
 
A little more info out there on this subject.

2012 Chase For the Cup TV Ratings: After an uptick last year, NASCAR's Chase For the Cup fell back to record-low levels. The 2012 Chase For the Cup averaged a 2.7 U.S. rating and 4.2 million viewers on ESPN and ABC, down 13% in ratings and 12% in viewership from last year (3.1, 4.763M), and flat in ratings and down 7% in viewership from 2010 (2.7, 4.494M). The 2.7 rating is tied with 2010 as the lowest ever for the Chase For the Cup (dates back to 2004). Complete historical viewership for the Chase was not available, but it is likely that this year's edition ranks as the least-viewed ever. Of the nine Chase races that can be compared to last year, eight had a decline in ratings and all nine had declines in viewership. Year-to-year comparisons were not available for the season-opener from Chicago, as last year's version of the race was rained out. Compared to the equivalent 2010 race, however, the Chicago opener was also down. The highest rating of the Chase was a 3.2 for the Talladega and Charlotte races. Talladega ranked as the most-viewed race, with 5.113 million viewers. The Loudon and Dover races were the lowest rated of the season, each earning an all-time Chase record low 2.2. The Loudon was as the least-viewed of the season, with 3.517 million viewers.
Click to expand...

Regardless of the general consensus on here it does look as though fans prefer Talladega. Interesting.


from sportsmediawatch
 
Nascar chooses to compete against programming that is going to beat it out almost every sunday.

IT's called football, and if Brian decided to not compete against it, more people would tune in.

ESPN and ABC screwed the whole thing up.

And, I don't give a real rats ass, as long as formula drift can find a spot on a tv network, nascar isn't going anywhere.

EDIT - And as far as the fans not showing up for the races, it's because they are expensive. You have to travel for hour and hours to goto a good race. Then you get to pay out the nose.

And if people don't show up enough for a track to keep TWO races, good, I want more track diversity anyhow.
 
They've been up against the NFL forever though. That's nothing new.

I do believe that the move to cable was a bad thing. Sure that is mainly where it had its roots but there are more people that have networks available to them than ESPN. We tend to all live in our own little bubble with the notion that everyone has ESPN and the like available to them. That's simply not the case. Even in this day of age.

The expense of attending the race has gone up big time over the past ten years. It's not so much the ticket prices, it's fuel. It costs me more than double what it used to to even get to a race these days. The seat is a bargain by comparison IMO. I can go to a Martinsville race with my wife and only pay $120 for a pair of great seats. I can camp for the week for $65 off of turn #3 within easy walking distance to the track. The problem for me is the $400+ that it takes to fuel my right down there and back. That makes it a tough deal to attend many of these. We're down to four a year now and that may decrease even more.

All of that being said, I'm in it for the long haul. I'll be watching until either it or I are gone, which ever comes first.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
It's not so much the ticket prices, it's fuel. It costs me more than double what it used to to even get to a race these days. The seat is a bargain by comparison IMO. I can go to a Martinsville race with my wife and only pay $120 for a pair of great seats. I can camp for the week for $65 off of turn #3 within easy walking distance to the track. The problem for me is the $400+ that it takes to fuel my right down there and back. That makes it a tough deal to attend many of these. We're down to four a year now and that may decrease even more.

All of that being said, I'm in it for the long haul. I'll be watching until either it or I are gone, which ever comes first.
Click to expand...
Yeah, M'ville is a real bargain. For those of you who aren't aware of it, Darlington offers a 50% military discount.

Compare race costs to other sporting events. Yeah, you can get some cheap seats for NFL or NBA for $50 or so, but look at all the other costs. You're not going to find free parking; add another $20 minimum. Figure another $30 or $40 when you get hungry or want something to drink, instead of being able to bring your stuff. If you're going to take kids under 12, you're nuts if you pay for a Cup ticket; take 'em to cheaper / free N'wide or Trucks races; short enough for their attention spans, more wrecks for them, and enough big names to get their attention.

But yeah, gas these days is a pain, and I'm getting too old to sleep on the ground.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Yeah, M'ville is a real bargain. For those of you who aren't aware of it, Darlington offers a 50% military discount.

Compare race costs to other sporting events. Yeah, you can get some cheap seats for NFL or NBA for $50 or so, but look at all the other costs. You're not going to find free parking; add another $20 minimum. Figure another $30 or $40 when you get hungry or want something to drink, instead of being able to bring your stuff. If you're going to take kids under 12, you're nuts if you pay for a Cup ticket; take 'em to cheaper / free N'wide or Trucks races; short enough for their attention spans, more wrecks for them, and enough big names to get their attention.

But yeah, gas these days is a pain, and I'm getting too old to sleep on the ground.
Click to expand...

I paid $50 at daytona. So did a bunch of other suckers.

And, w nascar events lodging costs are so huge its a joke. $300 / night for a crappy room. Or stay two hours away from the track. NOT FUN.
 
Yep, even the TV ratings decline is due to the economy. :rolleyes:

Even the races that are on broadcast, and not cable, are down in ratings.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
Yep, even the TV ratings decline is due to the economy. :rolleyes:

Even the races that are on broadcast, and not cable, are down in ratings.
Click to expand...
Why is it outside the realm of possibility that the economy can have an effect on the ratings? I mean, everyone's still got a TV, right? What about the people that used to be able to afford to go to these events but can no longer do so? Sometimes you lose interest in something when you no longer participate in it. Maybe no longer being able to attend these events has an effect on some? It's really not maybe, I know it does. Our family used to go to NASCAR races along with a couple neighbor families several years back over a number of years. When we didn't go to the races we watched the races together on Sunday's during the summer months. As time went on they were able to go to fewer and fewer races as are we. Eventually they were unable to attend any more races because of the cost to do so. Slowly they lost interest in what was once something that we all looked forward to each weekend. I'm not saying that's the answer across the board but I bet that plays a large role in the declining viewership.

The numbers tell the story though. While statistically the ratings are down as a whole for NASCAR over the years the biggest drop in ratings is the moment that they switch to cable. The only races on cable that grab 'FOX type' numbers are Bristol and Talladega. Even when you look at the single race that is broadcast on network television during the Chase @ Charlotte on ABC, the numbers spike for just that one race. If the numbers can be there for Bristol & Talladega on cable, why not the rest? Could it simply be that the casual fan just happens to hit it on their network channel while browsing for something to watch? I'm not a casual fan, I go out of my way to watch a NASCAR race or any other sporting event for that matter. Outside of sports I find myself spending most of my viewing within the locals and I'm guessing that might be the norm for most. Whatever the reason for the drop on cable broadcasts it's a fact that the ratings decrease for those events.

FOX already inked their deal into the distant future. It would be a huge benefit to NASCAR if they could score another network for the remaining races, especially the Chase. I'd also think that they'd benefit greatly from a shorter season. The fan base that NASCAR is trying to attract doesn't want to devote basically every Sunday from February-November to sitting in front of the TV. Most people today have the attention span of a stone. I'm thinking stones have really short attention spans. :D Could it be that FOX benefits greatly from having the beginning of the season schedule, when everyone's been NASCAR deprived? Perhaps. I love a great steak cooked on the grill every once and a while and really look forward to it but if I had it every week for 10 months I may grow to not like it as much.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
Why is it outside the realm of possibility that the economy can have an effect on the ratings?
Click to expand...

Because fans impacted by the economy stop going in person (the can't afford it) and instead watch on TV, increasing TV ratings.

What you just described is a sport losing it's fan base. That's not the economy's fault, it's NASCAR's fault.
 
ted@economy said:
Ninety minutes on Saturday or Sunday ?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Sorry, I didn't explain.

If I am paying out the nose to get to the track, Im going to have a few adult beverages, and then Im going to not drive. Staying at the track is the best. But I cannot reasonably break off a significant portion of my NET income to goto a race where a bag of ice is $20. Firewood is CHIT, and my neighbors need to have their awesome MCCULLAH generator at full tilt when Im trying to eat dinner.

If I made more money, could afford an RV, and could actually get a spot where there is power, I would go.

But until something changes, $1,500 will buy me a sweet TV and DTV all year!

Im not trying to tell others they are wrong for going, but in my world, I drive a 93 camry that has a severe oil leak, and I can't even scratch together enough for a ten year old car.

Money just ain't what it used to be. Unless you make more than me. Even then, it's tough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom