USAC and TV
 

Is USAC going to have any dates on TV this year?

Re: USAC and TV
 

Next USAC TV Broadcasts:


K&N USAC Silver Crown Series presented by Optima Batteries
"Copper on Dirt" Manzanita Speedway
April 19th at 5pm eastern on VS. Channel
Re-Air on April 24th at 5pm est


USAC/CRA Sprints & MOPAR USAC National Midgets & Western Midgets
"Copper on Dirt" Manzanita Speedway
May 10th at 5pm eastern on VS. Channel
Re-Air on May 15th at 5pm est

Re: USAC and TV
 

What the heck is VS.? Even on my Satellite provider I don't have that channel. I have Spanish soap opera channel but not this VS. channel.

Guess I see where USAC ranks with people like Speed, and ESPN. Heck Dodgeball can make it onto the ESPN oucho but USAC can't?

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by dirtywhiteboy:
Heck Dodgeball can make it onto the ESPN oucho but USAC can't?

If they signed up that Bateman character to announce, I'd prolly watch it, too!!!

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by dirtywhiteboy:
What the heck is VS.? Even on my Satellite provider I don't have that channel. I have Spanish soap opera channel but not this VS. channel.

Guess I see where USAC ranks with people like Speed, and ESPN. Heck Dodgeball can make it onto the ESPN oucho but USAC can't?

:applaud:Versus TV:rolling

Re: USAC and TV
 

I just saw that The Outlaws got a deal with Speed. It includes at least 3 live races and several tape delayed races.

How can The Outlaws get a deal and USAC cannot?

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by aussiemidgetfan:
superior marketing, an internationally recognised brand, similarity with local racing in every state (plus aus, nz and south africa), big names, speed, glamour, uniqueness (its not stock car racing). there is probably more and if it wasn't 11pm, I'm sure I could come up with more.

Actually, you can pick broadcast most anything, if you buy the airtime.

Re: USAC and TV
 

USAC had a live show once.....remember Thursday Night Thunder? And the battles between Irwin and Stewart - among others??? The Chili Bowl; PRI Show; (non USAC Sanctioned though) Turkey Night and Night before the 500 should all be televised....My guess is - with the success of the pay-per view event this last year - Speed will pick up the Chili bowl for 2009 or 2010...maybe that will translate to some USAC events being televised on Speed....

Re: USAC and TV
 

I doubt you ever see the Chili Bowl on anything but PPV. The leaders of the Chili Bowl have said many times the reason it won't be on tv is time constraints and commercials dictating the program. I remember when the Chili Bowl was on tv (ESPN) and it was interupted by commercials and sportscenter updates and those weren't warmly received then.

Thursday Night Thunder was on the same level as Sunday Morning Church in my hose. We never missed both.

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by sprntr:
Actually, you can pick broadcast most anything, if you buy the airtime.

Bingo! It's always about money. WoO will either pay to be on, or they have to find advertisers to foot the bill or both.

And once again Aussie Midget Fan, you don't have a clue. Because you say it, doesn't make it so.

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by aussiemidgetfan:
prove that i am wrong. do it. my statements are based on common sense with no attachment. yours are based on a clear attachment to USAC that at times blinds you to reality.

don't try to tell me either that coons, stanbrough, tracy hines or levi jones are as much household names as Steve Kinser, Danny Schatz or Joey Saldana because you know that is bs (and if you don't, it is because you haven't opened your eyes to reality)

You made the statement, not me. So the burden of proof is on you. Popularity or recognition is not the issue. The issue is what it takes to get your product on TV, which is $$$. Unless your product has absolutely proven to be a revenue generator for television, like American Idol, Super Bowl, etc., then you'll have to pay to be on there. WoO is not even a spec on the radar screen compared to TV shows like that.

If the Outlaws give you such a big woody, then why don't you go to one of their message boards where people share your excitement for them?

Re: USAC and TV
 

Quite interesting going through this post after I just finished reading the article in Sprint Car and Midget about the old Thunder Series.

Re: USAC and TV
 

Kevin Miller is way too busy fixing the Silver Crown Series(old car vs. new car) to worry too much about TV....right?

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by Seadog:
You made the statement, not me. So the burden of proof is on you. Popularity or recognition is not the issue. The issue is what it takes to get your product on TV, which is $$$. Unless your product has absolutely proven to be a revenue generator for television, like American Idol, Super Bowl, etc., then you'll have to pay to be on there. WoO is not even a spec on the radar screen compared to TV shows like that.

Although I agree with you Gregg in that money is the deciding factor, I think we all should consider where the money comes from --- No television program airs for free, and no exception is made to American Idol or the Superbowl, however they share a common thread in that they get fantastic sponsors.

I believe the aussie makes a good point in the differences between WOO and USAC - and those differences are probably some of the reasons why wingless cars may not pull the quality of sponsorship as their winged cousin - I would imagine that if winged sprints didnt look like some freak on dirt, and its popularity was based purely on the quality of the racing, we'd be seeing more USAC on the tube.

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by Seadog:
You made the statement, not me. So the burden of proof is on you. Popularity or recognition is not the issue. The issue is what it takes to get your product on TV, which is $$$. Unless your product has absolutely proven to be a revenue generator for television, like American Idol, Super Bowl, etc., then you'll have to pay to be on there. WoO is not even a spec on the radar screen compared to TV shows like that.

Boston kinda touched on this, but you say it's all about the money, NOT any of the things that aussie said, correct? Well, why is WoO able to pay the money to be on TV and USAC isn't? Seems to me that maybe some of the things that aussie mentioned come in to play, whether it is in relation to raising the money to pay for airtime, or if it translates directly to being provided with free airtime...........

Re: USAC and TV
 

This idea that 'VS' don't have viewers is crap.It's in Millions of house holds if you have direct tv turn to channel 603:angry-smiley-007:

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by Dano959:
Boston kinda touched on this, but you say it's all about the money, NOT any of the things that aussie said, correct? Well, why is WoO able to pay the money to be on TV and USAC isn't? Seems to me that maybe some of the things that aussie mentioned come in to play, whether it is in relation to raising the money to pay for airtime, or if it translates directly to being provided with free airtime...........

Are you serious? OK, try this on for size. WoO's for profit parent company has much, much deeper pockets than USAC does. That's how. Any more questions? Believe me, TV is all about money. Nothing is free. It has nothing to do with quality. American Idol is proof of that. I guarantee you that if USAC had the $$$ to be on TV, they would be there. When Thunder was on years ago, the TV landscape was very different.

Re: USAC and TV
 

Interesting......... All I ever hear about is that the parent company is losing millions and is gonna be filing for bankruptcy any day now.

I re-read both my original post, and also where you quoted it, and I don't see where I made ANY references to the quality of the product (racing or program).

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by Dano959:
Interesting......... All I ever hear about is that the parent company is losing millions and is gonna be filing for bankruptcy any day now

Ever heard of Chrysler or Ford? Those companies bleed money by the BILLIONS. That doesn't stop them from buying needed products or commercial time on TV or even spend money to race in Nascar. It's about upholding a public image for them regardless of their financial status. It's an "investment" if you will.

I'll say it again - It's about money. There is no such thing as free TV. Somebody has to pay for air time. And when all is said and done, it's the consumer - you and me - that really pays for it.

FYI - World Racing Group is still trading at 29 cents per share - not too stout. http://investing.businessweek.com/re...?capId=6654807

Re: USAC and TV
 

Gentlemen Gentlemen... its nice to hear such pleasant things about our beloved sport.

Just to clarify... Thursday night Thunder was paid for by ESPN... not by USAC. I believe the WoO spent about $2.5 million (rumored) to be on TV last year.
As someone said... if we (USAC) had $2.5 million to spend on TV... would we do it... YOU THINK??

Bottom line is that TV cost lots of money no matter who pays for it. Versus Channel is a Tier 1 Cable station as is SPEED. Each goes into the same households. If you think you don't have it... you probably still do. Call your cable provider to find out. All VS. is, is the old OLN channel.

For more info on the USAC TV Broadcasts on VS. please visit www.motorsportshour.com

rk

Re: USAC and TV
 

Time warner didn't carry speed unless you bought a upgraded package or paid five bucks a month for it. I suspect VS is the same for most of these.

It is included on both Dish and Direct TV basic plans.
IMHO it's the best sports channel on right now. NHL and Racing :)
Chuck, thinking Speed is almost all a series soap opera anymore and not much live racing other than Napcar.

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by Klepper:
Gentlemen Gentlemen... its nice to hear such pleasant things about our beloved sport.

Just to clarify... Thursday night Thunder was paid for by ESPN... not by USAC. I believe the WoO spent about $2.5 million (rumored) to be on TV last year.
As someone said... if we (USAC) had $2.5 million to spend on TV... would we do it... YOU THINK??

Bottom line is that TV cost lots of money no matter who pays for it. Versus Channel is a Tier 1 Cable station as is SPEED. Each goes into the same households. If you think you don't have it... you probably still do. Call your cable provider to find out. All VS. is, is the old OLN channel.

For more info on the USAC TV Broadcasts on VS. please visit www.motorsportshour.com

rk

I love it when you guys talk television. I can speak way more intelligently about television than racing! I happen to work for FOX which in turn owns Speed. I can 100% tell you airtime costs money. It's how I earn my paycheck and a network is only going to air a program if they can make money off of it by selling commercials a' la Thursday Thunder or selling is as a pay-per-view or block of time a' la Chili Bowl. Either way I can guarantee you the network is making money.

Where there is a small misconception is the Tier 1 reference...in *some* cable markets VS. and Speed are both Tier 1 - most likely major markets that have a cable interconnect like Indy but in your smaller markets (like Evansville) Speed is a Tier 1 but VS is a specialty network you only receive with a purchase of a digital package. This is going to be the case in all medium to smaller markets for VS. What that means is that the price to purchase air time on VS compared to Speed is much cheaper.

Television is a commodity industry sold on supply vs. demand - wish as I might we simply cannot just create more commercial breaks (even though it seems that way) to generate more money. The prices then are determined by the popularity of the program and the strength of the network. VS. is a much, much weaker network in terms of viewing compared to Speed.

With cable you also have to opportunity to broadcast events in a regional area of interest only, for instance, you may see west coast basketball games on ESPNU (a digital tier channel) if you live in that area while I might see a broadcast of my fabulous Salukis.

Some sports generate enough money to warrant the network carrying them - for instance my station is the only station in the country to pre-empt American Idol (which costs about $2500 per :30 commercial for local advertisers) to air UK basketball because it will generate more money for us as a station.

Anyone can buy time on television, I can air my 5 year olds soccer game if I have enough money. That said, I would love to sell some advertising to USAC - just call me! :rolling I'll cut you a great deal!

In all seriousness, airing on network television is not always the best decision an advertiser can make. There is a tremendous amount of risk to it and if you come off badly on live television you can't go back in time and save face but you'll live in infamy on youtube forever.

Sacha

Re: USAC and TV
 

Great post, Sacha. Very informative.:thumb

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by Dwight Clock:
Great post, Sacha. Very informative.:thumb

Thank you very much ~ I love to talk television.

Re: USAC and TV
 

So what USAC needs is about 10-15 sponsors willing to pony up about 5 grand ten times a year.

:)

Sounds simple enough but it would have to be at least hour programs, Stuffing them events in half hours slots with five interviews and ten thirty second comercials, WHY BOTHER WATCHING?

Chili Bowl almost over did it with interviews ect. they had a five hour time frame, Used 3.5 of it and showed about twenty minutes of actual racing.

Chuck, who'd at least like to see the consi and feature of each event shown (IN THEIR ENTIRETY)

P.S. Id much rather be at the track but not all of us can make them 800-2000 mile trips :)

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by Charles Nungester:
So what USAC needs is about 10-15 sponsors willing to pony up about 5 grand ten times a year.

:)

Sounds simple enough but it would have to be at least hour programs, Stuffing them events in half hours slots with five interviews and ten thirty second comercials, WHY BOTHER WATCHING?

Chili Bowl almost over did it with interviews ect. they had a five hour time frame, Used 3.5 of it and showed about twenty minutes of actual racing.

Chuck, who'd at least like to see the consi and feature of each event shown (IN THEIR ENTIRETY)

P.S. Id much rather be at the track but not all of us can make them 800-2000 mile trips :)

And this is why you will continue to see more events broadcast via the web because it is a much, much cheaper way to reach your viewers. It is cheaper to produce, you can target your audience more effectively, it can be sold on either a subscription or pay-per-view event. This is also the way that my generation (the echo-boomers or gen y) is going to view television in the future.

Re: USAC and TV
 

Originally Posted by wtvwrocks:
And this is why you will continue to see more events broadcast via the web because it is a much, much cheaper way to reach your viewers. It is cheaper to produce, you can target your audience more effectively, it can be sold on either a subscription or pay-per-view event. This is also the way that my generation (the echo-boomers or gen y) is going to view television in the future.

But what sux about it is, I and most people don't have 48-80 inch big screen puters.

I do have surround sound and subwoofer on my puter tho :)

Chuck, who watched the friday preview of the Chili Bowl on the net and thought it was ok but certainly not as good as the big screen.

Re: USAC and TV
 

"But what sux about it is, I and most people don't have 48-80 inch big screen puters."

--------------------------
When we did the Western World races on racenetwork.tv we had subscribers to the broadcast go out from their laptops to 40", 50" and 60" flat screen TVs - so it is possible to get the large screen viewing you desire with an Internet stream.

Ian

Re: USAC and TV
 

On our trips back to speedweek after Thursday Night thunder deal. We heard Tony George paid the bills for the USAC TV on ESPN. Was this true? About 2 million a year. Anyone know?:headbang
Joe