TV Ratings for the IRL 2006 Season

[Tim Northcutt]

I posted a similar thread in the Champ Car forum as well, because I haven't looked at any TV ratings for any of the races thus far this year for either Series.

In the CC "Merger" thread, Mountainstar posted that the IRL may have to buy their ESPN time next year due to low ratings thus far this season for those events

If any of you know the Ratings and Shares for each event, please post them.

Also, please note whether the event was on ESPN, ESPN2, or ABC when you do it.

Exposure is a key element of gaining sponsorhips and to grow the fanbase for the Series.

Thanks!

[D.R.T.]

Just found this in relation to the 2006 Indy 500

http://www.scenedaily.com/stories/20..._daily139.html

[Tim Northcutt]

I found a link that rated the ABC Watkins Glen telecast as a 0.8 rating and a 2 share.

Not great...IIRC, their network telecasts were over 1.0 most of the season after Danicamania began.

The Source:

http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,272|||sports,00.html

[Bluewolf]

Wow -- not good -- The IRL and CC have just got to get together, and losing ratings like this might be the driving force that finally seals the deal.

[paul-collins]

Homestead 0.8
St Petes 0.4
Motegi 0.3 (1)
Indy 5.0 (2)
Watkins Glen 0.8
Texas 0.6
Richmond 0.3
Kansas 1.2
Nashville
Milwaukee
Michigan
Kentucky
Sears Point
Chicago

(1) cribbed from another forum, where it was mentioned as an aside. I'm not sure if it's real or not.
(2) apparently an OW internet digest (TSO) has said it was 5.4?

[cache]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

Homestead 0.8
St Petes 0.4
Motegi 0.3 (1)
Indy 5.0 (2)
Watkins Glen 0.8
Texas 0.6
Richmond 0.3
Kansas
Nashville
Milwaukee
Michigan
Kentucky
Sears Point
Chicago

(1) cribbed from another forum, where it was mentioned as an aside. I'm not sure if it's real or not.
(2) apparently an OW internet digest has said it was 5.4?

Indy 's final was 5 according to nielson.Motegi ,Texas and Richmond ratings were never published, which means they were below 0.0. The real numbers may be .03 and .05. They were all on cable on saturday night and there have been numerous publications on other programs rated on these dates.When these programs don't show up, its because they are too low.

The numbers you have quoted were taken from the IRL website, TSO. The reference,"we're hearing" was used to give these ratings. There is no proof that any of these ratings are credible.Given that these ratings are not to be found in any credible source,they cannot be believed. I think it is a shame that anyone connected with the IRL would try to pass erroneous ratings to the fans and have them repeated on these forums as truth without proof. I hope this isn't the way the IRL choses to represent itself.

[paul-collins]

Originally Posted by cache

Indy 's final was 5 according to nielson.Motegi ,Texas and Richmond ratings were never published, which means they were below 0.0. The real numbers may be .03 and .05. They were all on cable on saturday night and there have been numerous publications on other programs rated on these dates.

While I can accept Motegi being that low, I think the "noise" rating for ESPN would be higher than 0.1 (which is about what Speed gets for non-NASCAR racing content).

I don't have access to TSO, and you're right, that's where the Motegi and higher Indy numbers come from.

The point of this thread is to, hopefully, get someone to chime in with independently released numbers. For example, I know Joyce Julius builds their cases on the viewership - anyone out there have access to their IRL sheets?

[cache]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

While I can accept Motegi being that low, I think the "noise" rating for ESPN would be higher than 0.1 (which is about what Speed gets for non-NASCAR racing content).

I don't have access to TSO, and you're right, that's where the Motegi and higher Indy numbers come from.

The point of this thread is to, hopefully, get someone to chime in with independently released numbers. For example, I know Joyce Julius builds their cases on the viewership - anyone out there have access to their IRL sheets?

Fair enough,but those ratings have been the most sought after these last weeks.They aren't available anywhere, while other programs are,which ususally means they didn't register. I don't think its honest to keep repeating unproven ratings as fact just because someone said they "heard " something. We all know that isn't a credible source. If they were never published, that's more credible that they weren't high enough.

[Fogelhund]

1.3 overnight from Kansas.

[indycool]

Heard that one, too, Fogel. And the finals for Indy were 5.1 against Charlotte's 5.0 but Indy had a perceptibly larger share number, as I recall.
Cache, those numbers were published.....you (and I) just didn't go to the trouble of finding them out from someone. As I've pointed out before, if you have a friend at a TV station, just call 'em. They can find them out for you as all stations subscribe to Nielsen. Nobody's keeping them a secret, but Nielsen obviously keeps a small lock on their subscriber list. When entities get .1s, they don't brag. If they get better, they do.

[cache]

Originally Posted by indycool

Heard that one, too, Fogel. And the finals for Indy were 5.1 against Charlotte's 5.0 but Indy had a perceptibly larger share number, as I recall.
Cache, those numbers were published.....you (and I) just didn't go to the trouble of finding them out from someone. As I've pointed out before, if you have a friend at a TV station, just call 'em. They can find them out for you as all stations subscribe to Nielsen. Nobody's keeping them a secret, but Nielsen obviously keeps a small lock on their subscriber list. When entities get .1s, they don't brag. If they get better, they do.

So they are a secret because the "entities" don't want us to know. We shouldn't believe any numbers without a source. I could post on a forum,"I'm hearing the numbers for any "race on cable" are xyz." Would you believe me? The problem is that the unsubstantiated numbers get repeated on other forums until they become a fake fact. A credible series would not do that.

[indycool]

The ratings are not OWNED or THE PROPERTY OF any series, CC, IRL, ALMS, NASCAR, any of them. They are the property of Nielsen (note spelling) and are sold to subscribers. If you have a few thousand laying around, subscribe. Otherwise, pick it up like the rest of us do. As I've posted many times, Sadie in Omaha, if she has a friend at a TV station can do it. Or a friend with an advertiser.

The IRL doesn't announce attendance figures. That's up to the promoters who bought the show. CC frequently puts attendance numbers in website stories but usually attributes them to the promoters or media estimates. The IRL nor CC nor NASCAR announce Nielsen ratings. If they get a good one, the papers pick it up which have subscription services to Nielsen for announcement purposes. If not, they generally don't say anything and folks like you and I hafta hunt for it. But it's not that we can't find 'em.

As Tim suggested, zap2it is a good source site, but not for the little ones that don't "make the cut."

[cache]

Originally Posted by indycool

The ratings are not OWNED or THE PROPERTY OF any series, CC, IRL, ALMS, NASCAR, any of them. They are the property of Nielsen (note spelling) and are sold to subscribers. If you have a few thousand laying around, subscribe. Otherwise, pick it up like the rest of us do. As I've posted many times, Sadie in Omaha, if she has a friend at a TV station can do it. Or a friend with an advertiser.

The IRL doesn't announce attendance figures. That's up to the promoters who bought the show. CC frequently puts attendance numbers in website stories but usually attributes them to the promoters or media estimates. The IRL nor CC nor NASCAR announce Nielsen ratings. If they get a good one, the papers pick it up which have subscription services to Nielsen for announcement purposes. If not, they generally don't say anything and folks like you and I hafta hunt for it. But it's not that we can't find 'em.

As Tim suggested, zap2it is a good source site, but not for the little ones that don't "make the cut."

I didn't say the IRL owned the ratings. I am well aware of the rest of the information. I agree that the Richmond and Texas ratings were the "little ones" that didn't make the cut.

The ratings posted in this thread have no source and should not be posted.

[indycool]

Well, you're the one saying that what everyone has posted is wrong. What's your source for why they're wrong?

[cache]

Originally Posted by cache

Indy 's final was 5 according to nielson.Motegi ,Texas and Richmond ratings were never published, which means they were below 0.0. The real numbers may be .03 and .05. They were all on cable on saturday night and there have been numerous publications on other programs rated on these dates.When these programs don't show up, its because they are too low.

The numbers you have quoted were taken from the IRL website, TSO. The reference,"we're hearing" was used to give these ratings. There is no proof that any of these ratings are credible.Given that these ratings are not to be found in any credible source,they cannot be believed. I think it is a shame that anyone connected with the IRL would try to pass erroneous ratings to the fans and have them repeated on these forums as truth without proof. I hope this isn't the way the IRL choses to represent itself.

Back to square one IC. TSO is not a credible source,therefore those ratings are not legitimate and should not be repeated. I can't make this any clearer,everyone gets it. You can't post numbers and then say prove them wrong. Richmond and Texas and Motegi ratings are not to be found ,therefore we can assume the they are "the little ones " that didn't make the cut,by your own explaination.

[indycool]

Cache, Mark C's site can't be considered a credible source, either. But zap2it and sports business daily are.

There ARE Nielsen numbers for Richmond, Texas and Motegi. There is NO mythical "cut." They're just harder to find. Some posters, as I said, can find 'em from credible sources, others, I guess, can't.

If you're one who can't, sorry 'bout that.

[paul-collins]

Okay, enough of this, guys. I'll mark the entries that apparently came from TSO as such. If confirmed independently the mark comes off; if disputed, noted. This is not a thread for debating the merits of particular "news" sites.

[indycool]

Cool, p-c. And if Cache or anyone else wants or needs that info for EITHER CC or IRL races and doesn't believe what someone posts, as I said, it's easy enough to call someone with your local TV station or even probably the TV editor of the local paper or the advertising people or agencies for the sponsors of the telecast or the myriad of people at the networks themselves or people with companies who have been approached about BEING sponsors, or the marketing guys for the teams who get the information and use it in sponsor proposals (or choose not to, also), or...............

[Tim Northcutt]

I have heard that the Kansas Race on ABC on July 2 pulled a 1.2 Rating and a 3 Share.

Not bad, but could still do some growing.

[indycool]

That's what I got through MY TV station source, Tim. You won't see it at Mark C.'s, though....too good.

[luke]

Originally Posted by indycool

Cache, Mark C's site can't be considered a credible source, either. But zap2it and sports business daily are.

There ARE Nielsen numbers for Richmond, Texas and Motegi. There is NO mythical "cut." They're just harder to find. Some posters, as I said, can find 'em from credible sources, others, I guess, can't.

If you're one who can't, sorry 'bout that.

I remember once upon a time, to Indy fans, the indystar was once a credible source...

[Tim Northcutt]

The Indy Star is a credible source, luke....

Anyone who thinks the Star is some sort of mouthpiece for the IRL is way off-base....both Curt Cavin and Steve Ballard are fair, balanced, and objective in their coverage.

[luke]

From Indy star: 'Champ Car & IRL close to merging!' and based on absolutely nothing!

[paul-collins]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

Homestead 0.8
St Petes 0.4
Motegi 0.3 (1)
Indy 5.0 (2)
Watkins Glen 0.8
Texas 0.6
Richmond 0.3
Kansas 1.2
Nashville 0.3 (3)
Milwaukee
Michigan
Kentucky
Sears Point
Chicago

(1) cribbed from another forum, where it was mentioned as an aside. I'm not sure if it's real or not.
(2) apparently an OW internet digest (TSO) has said it was 5.4?

(3) cribbed from speed forum

[drewdawg727]

can someone tell a dumbhead like me what these numbers mean..? Are they millions?