ALMS reaches multi year agreement with ESPN and ABC
03-30-2011, 10:44 PM
#151
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The increase is nice over previous internet streaming - but I'd bet the # of watchers on TV was still an order of magnitude higher number than the # watchers who actually watched the live stream.
I'm actually watching the replay right now as I missed the race that weekend. That is a plus to this system though.
I'm actually watching the replay right now as I missed the race that weekend. That is a plus to this system though.
03-30-2011, 11:11 PM
#152
Former Vendor
This is so misleading. The viewership moved from TV to the internet so what that means is that not many people will watch an internet feed if there is a TV option. A 147% increase seems like a small number when you consider what it should have been if everyone who would have watched it on TV instead watched it on the internet.
147% increase could be a few thousand people or it could be a few hundred. If the super deal was supposed to cover 65 million households I would expect the internet viewership would jump by 1000% but it would seem that many either did not or could not make the switch to the web.
I could not and never will be able to so I have a very difficult time thinking that this is a good move.
If they broke all these records just imagine how the viewer count would have gone up if everyone could just turn on their TV to watch.
They have no choice but to keep selling this so I doubt the stats quite frankly.
They should have done a better selling job in the pre-season so we could watch on TV.
147% increase could be a few thousand people or it could be a few hundred. If the super deal was supposed to cover 65 million households I would expect the internet viewership would jump by 1000% but it would seem that many either did not or could not make the switch to the web.
I could not and never will be able to so I have a very difficult time thinking that this is a good move.
If they broke all these records just imagine how the viewer count would have gone up if everyone could just turn on their TV to watch.
They have no choice but to keep selling this so I doubt the stats quite frankly.
They should have done a better selling job in the pre-season so we could watch on TV.
03-31-2011, 09:12 AM
#153
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I'm skeptical.
03-31-2011, 09:13 AM
#154
Rennlist Member
03-31-2011, 09:22 AM
#155
Former Vendor
No it's not. It specifically states it's a 147% increase over a previous event on ESPN3 which doesn't amount to much since the vast majority of viewers, if given the choice and the event is shown at the same time on TV, will watch the damn TV. This stat is not overall. Besides, how does the viewership on TV go up when about 25% country couldn't watch due to the tennis match preempting it?
I'm skeptical.
I'm skeptical.
BTW, I never mentioned a 147 percent either. I was simply referencing their claim that viewership was up 3 fold over the next highest watched ALMS event (Sebring 2009).
03-31-2011, 10:31 AM
#156
Burning Brakes
purely due to the MASSIVE increase in passive viewership. NOBODY sits around on a Sunday afternoon wondering what is on SPEED. People flip onto ABC instinctively. While it may not have hit as many avid fans, there was a HUGE increase in passive fans. Just imagine what the numbers would have been if the other quarter of the country hadn't been stuck watching tennis!
BTW, I never mentioned a 147 percent either. I was simply referencing their claim that viewership was up 3 fold over the next highest watched ALMS event (Sebring 2009).
BTW, I never mentioned a 147 percent either. I was simply referencing their claim that viewership was up 3 fold over the next highest watched ALMS event (Sebring 2009).
Also the quote you posted from ALMS states, "The live full-length race telecast on ESPN3.com was the most watched auto racing event ever on the outlet, 147 percent over the previous high," refers to the increase race viewership on ESPN3. So how many other races has ESPN3 aired and what were they? A 147% increase over a LeMons race would be easy.
03-31-2011, 12:35 PM
#157
Former Vendor
I am going to post this again. This quote from the site covers ALL medium. The number of households and viewers watching America’s oldest sports car race on ABC, ESPN2 and ESPN3.com was more than three times the next-highest total which occurred during the 2009 season.
I am not making any assumptions. You said it yourself "AS A RACE FAN, i do go first to SPEED." The big gain in viewership isn't among race fans, they are going to watch anyway, so there is no point showing it on SPEED when SPEED fails to promote ALMS as a brand. The big gain is among casual viewers that ARE watching ABC on a Sunday afternoon because there is nothing else on. How can YOU make assumptions based only on YOUR experiences. There are plenty of people who watch ABC, it is still one of the top channels.
CCA said: How can you make absolute these assumptions. As a race fan, I do go first to SPEED and I truly cannot think of a show that I watch on ABC.
03-31-2011, 01:00 PM
#158
Drifting
If the Sebring coverage was such a huge success how come the ALMS followed it up with a letter from the CEO addressing the fans frustations and anger about the broadcast? Why are ALMS teams like Risi and Magnus ridiculing the coverage on their websites? Why are automotive websites and magazines that are normally very pro-ALMS questioning the broadcast deal? Why is the tone of this thread so negative and why is it 11 pages long? And where the hell can I buy a 25 foot long VGA cable??
03-31-2011, 01:09 PM
#159
Former Vendor
Obviously because there are those that are unhappy about it. Clearly there is room for improvement, but it isn't the pile of poo that everyone claims it was.
There is an upside and a downside. Clearly, in moving forward, the Luddites will be left behind. Clearly there was a slow feed coming out of the track at Sebring so there were some connectivity issues. Clearly some people are reacting to this with assumptions that since it is online, NOBODY watched it.
I am not saying it is a perfect system, but it is better than SPEED and it is better than nothing. Doesn't anyone remember the bitching that occurred last year when SPEED interrupted the coverage for 4 hours to show some NASCAR Truck Series Qualifying or whatever? This year the TRUE fans got 14 UNINTERRUPTED hours of coverage PLUS qualifying. There is NO way SPEED would have broadcast that much of the race. SPEED didn't care about ALMS, so ALMS moved onward.
There is an upside and a downside. Clearly, in moving forward, the Luddites will be left behind. Clearly there was a slow feed coming out of the track at Sebring so there were some connectivity issues. Clearly some people are reacting to this with assumptions that since it is online, NOBODY watched it.
I am not saying it is a perfect system, but it is better than SPEED and it is better than nothing. Doesn't anyone remember the bitching that occurred last year when SPEED interrupted the coverage for 4 hours to show some NASCAR Truck Series Qualifying or whatever? This year the TRUE fans got 14 UNINTERRUPTED hours of coverage PLUS qualifying. There is NO way SPEED would have broadcast that much of the race. SPEED didn't care about ALMS, so ALMS moved onward.
03-31-2011, 01:10 PM
#160
Burning Brakes
...I am not making any assumptions. You said it yourself "AS A RACE FAN, i do go first to SPEED." The big gain in viewership isn't among race fans, they are going to watch anyway, so there is no point showing it on SPEED when SPEED fails to promote ALMS as a brand. The big gain is among casual viewers that ARE watching ABC on a Sunday afternoon because there is nothing else on. How can YOU make assumptions based only on YOUR experiences. There are plenty of people who watch ABC, it is still one of the top channels.
03-31-2011, 01:20 PM
#161
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
I don't see a good business model in trying to catch the casual fan by alienating the avid fan. You want to show the shortened version on ABC on Sunday to catch that casual fan? Great idea!! Just don't make it difficult if not impossible for your CURRENT fan base to consume your product.
__________________
Bob Saville
Getting You On Track!
www.naroescapemotorsports.com
704-395-2975
'07 SPC
'71 914/6 Huey
'04 GT3
Bob Saville
Getting You On Track!
www.naroescapemotorsports.com
704-395-2975
- Data Analysis & Coaching
- Drivers Gear
- Crew Gear
- Car Gear
'07 SPC
'71 914/6 Huey
'04 GT3
03-31-2011, 01:37 PM
#162
Race Director
If ALMS is serious about gaining a larger fan base they need to cover their races on TV...ESPN/ABC or Speed and so forth. I'm not going to sit in front of my computer to watch TV and not many people are.
ALMS is alienating themselves from current and potential viewers with ESPN3.
ALMS is alienating themselves from current and potential viewers with ESPN3.
03-31-2011, 06:26 PM
#163
Former Vendor
No offense was intended and none was taken. Sorry if it seemed like I was offended. This is trivial stuff in the scheme of it. I am just trying to curtail the HATE for ALMS this season. Not everyone will agree with me, but I think it is a great thing, and it works very well for me!
03-31-2011, 07:00 PM
#164
Rennlist Member
If ALMS is serious about gaining a larger fan base they need to cover their races on TV...ESPN/ABC or Speed and so forth. I'm not going to sit in front of my computer to watch TV and not many people are.
ALMS is alienating themselves from current and potential viewers with ESPN3.
ALMS is alienating themselves from current and potential viewers with ESPN3.
I agree completely. There is simply no way at the current time that they can grow the already small fan base of this series without TV coverage. I have already spoken with one of the teams, and if they are any indication of the mood of the participants of this series, there is real concern with this whole "new media" package, and the management of the series in general.
03-31-2011, 09:37 PM
#165
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Obviously because there are those that are unhappy about it. Clearly there is room for improvement, but it isn't the pile of poo that everyone claims it was.
There is an upside and a downside. Clearly, in moving forward, the Luddites will be left behind. Clearly there was a slow feed coming out of the track at Sebring so there were some connectivity issues. Clearly some people are reacting to this with assumptions that since it is online, NOBODY watched it.
I am not saying it is a perfect system, but it is better than SPEED and it is better than nothing. Doesn't anyone remember the bitching that occurred last year when SPEED interrupted the coverage for 4 hours to show some NASCAR Truck Series Qualifying or whatever? This year the TRUE fans got 14 UNINTERRUPTED hours of coverage PLUS qualifying. There is NO way SPEED would have broadcast that much of the race. SPEED didn't care about ALMS, so ALMS moved onward.
There is an upside and a downside. Clearly, in moving forward, the Luddites will be left behind. Clearly there was a slow feed coming out of the track at Sebring so there were some connectivity issues. Clearly some people are reacting to this with assumptions that since it is online, NOBODY watched it.
I am not saying it is a perfect system, but it is better than SPEED and it is better than nothing. Doesn't anyone remember the bitching that occurred last year when SPEED interrupted the coverage for 4 hours to show some NASCAR Truck Series Qualifying or whatever? This year the TRUE fans got 14 UNINTERRUPTED hours of coverage PLUS qualifying. There is NO way SPEED would have broadcast that much of the race. SPEED didn't care about ALMS, so ALMS moved onward.
Face it, too many people were left without a way to watch. I also think the uptick in viewers was probably web hits which probably was a limited number of viewers that checked in a few times during the broadcast or even more likely, logged in and out because the feed was so bad. Each log in was counted as a viewer. I do not believe the spin.
Me thinks they doth protest too much . . .