Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Official IRL TV Ratings

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Official IRL TV Ratings

    Okay, from Sports Business Journal's daily email.......bookmark it if you want to argue about 'em all next year......

    IRL Ratings Speed Past ’04 Marks
    The following presents average Nielsen ratings for each network airing races during the ’05 IRL season, as well as race-by-race ratings, with comparisons to ’04. It appears Danica Patrick did not have to win a race during her rookie season to help television ratings. All three networks airing IRL races posted ratings gains over last year. ESPN aired the majority of races this season and posted a 50% gain from ’04 (THE DAILY).

    IRL RATINGS BY NETWORK
    NET '05 AVG. (NO. OF RACES) '04 AVG. (NO. OF RACES) %+/-
    ABC 2.0 (7) 1.20 (10) 53.8%
    ESPN 0.6 (9) 0.40 (4) 50.0%
    ESPN2 0.4 (1) 0.20 (2) 100.0%

    IRL RATINGS BY RACE
    DATE RACE (LOCATION) '05 RAT (NET) '04 RAT (NET)
    March 6 Toyota Indy 300 (Homestead, FL) 0.6 (ESPN) 0.9 (ESPN)
    March 19 XM Satellite Radio Indy 200^ (Phoenix, AZ) 0.6 (ABC) 0.9 (ABC)
    April 3 Honda Grand Prix of St. Petersburg^^ (St. Petersburg, FL) 0.4 (ESPN) NA
    April 30 Indy Japan 300 (Motegi, Japan) 0.5 (ESPN) 0.1 (ESPN2)
    May 29 Indianapolis 500 (Indianapolis, IN) 6.8 (ABC) 4.1 (ABC)
    June 11(p) Bombardier Learjet 500 (Fort Worth, TX) 1.0 (ESPN) 0.4 (ESPN)
    June 25(p) SunTrust Indy Challenge (Richmond, VA) 0.4 (ESPN2) 0.2 (ESPN2)
    July 3 Argent Mortgage Indy 300^^^ (Kansas, KS) 1.1 (ESPN) 1.2 (ABC)
    July 16(p) Firestone Indy 200 (Nashville, TN) 0.3 (ESPN) 0.5 (ESPN)
    July 24 ABC Supply Co. / A.J. Foyt 225 (West Allis, WI) 0.5 (ESPN) 0.8 (ABC)
    July 31 Firestone Indy 400 (Brooklyn, MI) 1.3 (ABC) 0.8 (ABC)
    Aug. 14 Amber Alert Portal Indy 300^# (Sparta, KY) 0.9 (ABC) 0.8 (ABC)
    Aug. 21 Honda Indy 225 (Fountain, CO) 0.8 (ABC) 0.5 (ABC)
    Aug. 28 Argent Mortgage Indy Grand Prix^& (Sonoma, CA) 0.6 (ESPN) 0.9 (ABC)
    Sept. 11 Peak Antifreeze Indy 300 (Joliet, IL) 1.0 (ABC) 0.80 (ABC)
    Sept. 25 Watkins Glen Indy Grand Prix^$ (Watkins Glen, NY) 0.7 (ABC) NA
    Oct. 16 Toyota Indy 400 (Fontana, CA) 0.6 (ESPN) 0.10 (ESPN)

    NA = Not applicable. ^ = Previously Copper World Indy 200. ^^ = New event in ‘05. ^^^ = Previously Argent Mortgage Indy 200. ^# = Previously Belterra Casino 300. ^& = New event in ‘05, compared to ‘04 Firestone Indy 225 at Nazareth Speedway. ^$ = New event in ‘05. (p) = Primetime races.
    "The lunatic fringes on both sides need to be written off." -- stnky pete

  • #2
    Hmmm:

    All three networks airing IRL races posted ratings gains over last year. ESPN aired the majority of races this season and posted a 50% gain from ’04

    Comment


    • #3
      What does Sports Business Journal know anyhow.





      Chicago Blackhawks done didn't do it again!

      Comment


      • #4
        Pretty close to what we had with this:
        http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/6...ratings2nh.png

        A few are off, but the vast majority match.

        I still don't get how they get a 2.0 for the ABC races!

        I see this:
        0.6
        6.8
        1.3
        0.9
        0.8
        1
        0.7

        For an average of 1.7. That's not 2.0.

        jono

        Comment


        • #5
          Hmmm.... I just thought of something.

          Maybe 2.0 takes into account the length of the broadcast. i.e. instead of adding up all the ratings for the year and dividing by the number of races, they use a fudge-factor that takes time into account.

          It actually would make a certain degree of sense.

          jono

          Comment


          • #6
            Interesting data. But, if I am to play data analysis critic, one thing jumps out at me. ABC had less races this year, which would inflate the effect of the IRL's highest rated race (Indy 500) on ABC's ratings. However, the overall increase in ratings leads me to believe that even if all races were broadcast on the same venue as last year, the ratings would still show an increase. Also, night-time Saturday is not Prime time. It's actually the lowest rated night of the week and considered worse than Saturday afternoon.

            Here's some more number crunching.

            When only counting races with prior races for comparison, there is a 35.5% increase in ratings. (1.17 from 0.86)
            Overall, there is a 23% increase (1.06 from 0.86)
            5 races had decreased ratings, of which 2 moved from network to cable. avg decrease = 30.5%
            Greatest decrease = 40% (Milwalkee)
            9 races had increased ratings. One of which moved from ESPN from ESPN2
            avg increase = 153%, 4 races had increases of over 100%
            Highest increase = 500% (Fontana)
            3 new races with .57 ratings (2 of 3 on ABC) 46% of average rating.

            Highest non-Indy Rating = 1.3 (Michigan), up from .8 (62.5%)
            Lowest Rated race = 0.3 (Nashville), down from 0.5 (40%)
            vs last year
            Highest non-Indy 1.2 (Kansas), This year 1.1 down 8.3%
            Lowest Rated race = .1 (tie Motegi and Fontana) This year, M = .5, F = .6, up 450% (avg)

            Note: Controling for broadcast time strikes me as a legitimate statistical technique. Longer broadcast = More ad time to sell and vice versa. That would also inflate last year's ratings more than this year's due to a longer broadcast time and less non-Indy races.
            It's impossible, that's sure. So let's start working.- Phillipe Petit

            Talent borrows, Genius steals. - Pablo Picasso

            Ah, there's nothing more exciting than science. You get all the fun of sitting still, being quiet, writing down numbers, paying attention... Science has it all.

            Comment


            • #7
              Regardless of the percentage, the ratings are up. I'll take it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Chitownfan
                Regardless of the percentage, the ratings are up. I'll take it.
                When you're in a hole everything looks up
                I didn't realise how bad 2004 was

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by elio
                  When you're in a hole everything looks up
                  I didn't realise how bad 2004 was
                  Let's see how the compact schedule, Danica and the promotion goes in '05. I'm optimistic.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Highest increase = 500% (Fontana)

                    Look out Nascar! From a .1 to .6 in a mere year! Too bad they dropped this event.
                    Trump, he's one of the nicest, most decent human beings possibly ever to walk the planet..

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Chitownfan
                      Let's see how the compact schedule, Danica and the promotion goes in '05. I'm optimistic.
                      I predict about the same as this past year.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thanks for sharing. If anything, this should reduce the number of disagreements over what the ratings were this past season.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by indycool
                          IRL RATINGS BY NETWORK

                          ABC 2.0
                          ESPN 0.6
                          ESPN2 0.4
                          If you look at these ratings from a household standpoint it looks something like this:

                          ABC 2.0 = 2.192m hh
                          ESPN 0.6 = 492k hh
                          ESPN2 0.4 = 287k hh

                          This certainly shows the importance of broadcast over cable.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The 1.0 and 1.3 we pulled on ESPN......those are GOOD numbers for cable....
                            the man in expensive shoes

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by numrounofan
                              The 1.0 and 1.3 we pulled on ESPN......those are GOOD numbers for cable....
                              Not SpongeBob re-run good, but I can live with it.
                              It's a Hoosier thing, you wouldn't understand...

                              Comment

                              Unconfigured Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X