On moving to ESPN

[Grits]

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article.main&articleId=58375&requestTimeout=900

Interesting notes at EquiD. in Street and Smith report about several sports that have moved to ESPN. Horseracing is among them--and it doesn't appear to be a positive one in growing the sport, certainly, where viewership is concerned.

More brilliance on Breeders' Cup's part.

[andicap]

More superficially vapid analysis and reflexive criticism of an industry which frequently deserves it -- but not in this instance.
First, to those who do not know my background. I used to write about the business of television. More specifically, often the business of television sports. In fact I've written for Sports Business Journal the publication which wrote the above mentioned story. I covered ESPN for 20 years. So I know what I'm talking about.



Here is the relevant portion of the story - in the middle of the report -- about horse racing. The story notes the ratings decline in moving from NBC to ESPN, how the Saturday show is drawing several hundred thousand fewer viewers on ESPN than on NBC.
Fair use quote from Sports Business Journal:

ESPN, however, says the television ratings number does not tell the whole story. ESPN provides much more coverage than NBC, including Friday and Saturday windows, whereas NBC only provided Saturday coverage.
Though the total TV audience was more than cut in half, the male 18-34 demo actually grew on ESPN. NBC’s last Breeders’ Cup race in 2005 attracted 1.139 million 18-34 men. Last year, ESPN and ESPN2 reached 1.401 million men with its coverage.

“Horse racing organizers are sensitive to their aging demo,” an ESPN insider said. “They’re pleased to see growth in that younger demo.”
-----------------------------------------------------------

So racing is getting MORE coverage on ESPN -- the Friday days as well as all the BC programming and SportsCenter coverage the sport gets leading up to the BC. And Mike and Mike talking about it on ESPN Radio, stories in ESPN Magazine, and on and on.
So what if the overall ratings are down? Much of the broadcast network audience are people who have the TV on in the background -- tuned to ANYTHING -- . If youre watching ESPN youre definitely a sports fan.
And your getting more YOUNGER MEN watchiing -- that's the audience you crave, you NEED for your future. That stat alone, the additional 260,000 young men watching the BC makes the entire switch to ESPN worthwhile.

[ceejay]

I'll bet the NHL guys are wishing they were back where the sports viewers are, ESPN, rather than comcast/oln/vs and their own NHL network. I think I read that ratings are beyond bad.

[voucher]

Just wait till a big race gets bumped or delayed for something like "the little league world series"

[ceejay]

I think that's already happened......

[Grits]

Andicap, I understand what you are saying; still I cannot, for the life of me, believe that viewership, dropping by half, regardless of age demographic, could be seen as beneficial to a sport that is struggling as badly as horseracing is.

Yes, 18 to 34 year olds are desirable, for the future of the game. As a whole though, I wonder how that age group's disposable income stands up to those of us who have a few more years in the rearview mirror?

I'm inclined to believe . . . they can afford to risk (at play) much less.

"Though the total TV audience was more than cut in half, the male 18-34 demo actually grew on ESPN. NBC’s last Breeders’ Cup race in 2005 attracted 1.139 million 18-34 men. Last year, ESPN and ESPN2 reached 1.401 million men with its coverage."

[banacek]

And because of this, in Canada you can't see it at all. I've missed the last 2 years on TV (except for the Friday races last year)

[Oddzilla]

The article either excuses ESPN's lower Breeders Cup ratings due to their expanded broadcast of two days of Breeders Cup championships--or trumpets those two days of BC races as a network initiative improving over NBC's one-day-only national TV coverage. But NBC could not broadcast both days of Breeders Cup races. The Friday card did not exist yet. Even the first year ESPN had the BC, the Friday card did not exist--and that's when ratings first dropped sharply off the map. Am I wrong? Was there a Friday BC Championship card years and years ago?

Yes, 18 to 34 year olds are desirable, for the future of the game. As a whole though, I wonder how that age group's disposable income stands up to those of us who have a few more years in the rearview mirror?

I'm inclined to believe . . . they can afford to risk (at play) much less.

Income makes no difference if you get bit by the horse racing bug (a horsefly?). I'm an 18-34 year-old horse racing fan, don't have much disposbale income, but find horse racing very enriching and involving on many different levels, and absolutely consume and devour it. Not only do I bet what I can afford to play with, and I win my fair share, but I buy all kinds of horse racing stuff from photos to T-shirts all the time. There are a lot of things I used to spend my little bit of money on, but horse racing owns me more and more each year. It's intellectually stimulating and stirs real emotions in ways that the crap Hollywood produces will never equal. Plus, it's always fun to win money if you like to bet horses.

As far as ESPN and horse racing, I'm disappointed with their completely uninspired lack of ambition and enterprise to capitalize on growing horse racing's audience. There are all kinds of ESPN channels on cable, and not enough variety--almost never any horse racing for cable viewers who would love to see horse races without having to order Dish TV. ESPN has the Breeders Cup for years to come and do too little to make the audience grow--they simply don't broadcast enough races or features about horse racing throughout the year. You can't just suddenly go "watch the Breeders Cup this weekend" and expect every other kind of sports nut to tune in when you've never even bothered before to demonstrate how cool racehorses are, how exciting it is to pick winners and watch a race, and how much fun it is too win some money from your handicapping efforts--one of the most challenging tests of intellect in the world. And what's with all the bull riding on ESPN? Damn you, ESPN! Damn you!

I realise all network and cable broadcasters have failed to market horse racing on TV, but they don't even try. They use it as filler. (And if you're stuck with cable, write to your provider and demand HRTV and TVG.)

[ny0707ny]

Did they actually show any of the races leading up to the Derby this year yet?

A race takes less than 2 minutes. Why can't you show a box even in the right corner of the screen while showing another sport so we can see the race????

Maybe my rocket science idea will get around one day. I didn't think that took much thought though.

[Grits]

Oddzilla, it is fantastic, it is outstanding, that this sport has a young fan like you. The biggest smile has crossed my face reading what you have written. And something tells me that this may have come by your own hard work and desire. Not anything that Breeders' Cup or ESPN could take credit for.

I hope it brings you this much fun, this much joy, for many years to come. And I hope that intellect continues to ferret out winners for you.

BIG WINNERS!;) . . . . Again, what a joy to read your post.

[Kelso]

ESPN2 has 5 one-hour boxing shows scheduled between 7PM and midnight, Eastern. With the hourly format, it appears to me that none of the contests will be broadcast live.

This is not in any way a knock on boxing ... I very much enjoy watching a good fight at any level. But I gotta think ESPN2 might draw a hell of a lot more - and a hell of a lot more upscale - viewers if it simply rotated through the track feeds from the six tracks with live evening cards tonight: CT - PEN - DED - HOU - RP - LA

Run one race every five-to-ten minutes and maybe don't announce what race will be next until the current race has started. That way, there are no bottlenecks if a race is delayed by a loose horse or some such. With six tracks, there's sure to be a race going off within a few minutes.

Wouldn't the tracks be happy to provide the feeds for free, just for the positive impact on some of their pools? Wouldn't the various wagering services pay good money to advertise their services to such a "pre-qualified" audience? How 'bout advertising from tracks with daytime meets underway?

Pre-supposing no conflicts with existing TV licenses, I think ESPN should experiment with a season of live, nighttime racing - one night (the same night) each week. They might be very pleased with the ratings after only a month or so. Would the racing viewership likely be any worse than it will be for tonight's 5 hours of canned boxing?

[rokitman]

I don't think it really means a thing that the Breeders Cup ratings went from 2 million to 1 million. They should have been expected to do just that. NBC is one of the original networks. People just have it on, like their old stinky but very comfortable slippers. Particularly, older people. NBC would have a million viewers on a Saturday afternoon even if it was showing a paint drying contest. Not that many people would be actually watching, but it would be on as they iron the old man's plaid polyester pants, or bang out the old lady's bird house. And then there are those that still don't even have cable, like my mother. She always watched the Breeders Cup before. Of course, she didn't last year.

If it went from 20 million to 10 million, that would be different. But 2 mill to 1, from major network to cable sports channel, doesn't mean a thing to me. And I would bet that the numbers go up from year to year now. They mentioned the reason why in the article-the right demographic went up. And it is now on a channel that people go to for only two reasons-they love sports and/or gambling.

Welcome, Dumb Money.

Hallelujah.

[SMOO]

I'm not a Jim Rome fan, but since he bought ownership in a horse he has been pimping horse racing a lot on one of the most listened to radio shows in the USA.

[racefinder2]

I was in the 18-34 age group when I started following racing in the early 90's,
when there much better TV coverage. I have a question---whats with the disappearing act ?????

ACRS series, covering big Hcp races like SA Hcp, Oaklawn Hcp, Pim Special
Gone. (Early-Mid 90s, channels-unknown)
ABC-W W of Sports, covered a lot of important races. Early 90's--2000 or so.
Gone.
ESPN2-2day at the races, late 90s, recapped/showed live many important stakes races. Gone.
ESPN-Thoroughbred Digest, next, Racehorse Digest, next Wire-to-Wire, Wkly recap show of almost all important races. With race coverage seeming to decrease from the backstretch run close up, to, at the end, a 3-5 sound bite of the stretch run to the wire on a smaller and smaller pct of the screen. Gone.
ESPN-Major Hcp races, Early 3yo prep races, ???? Am I missing something or have I not seen a single telecast this year?

The only racing on TV that I can recall was the Sunshine Millions, which was heavily promoted by the Stronach empire(I think). If it werent for the internet, I wouldnt have a clue WHAT was going on anymore.......As far as
demographics, hasnt anyone heard of interest passing from generation to generation..its like these weird proclamations that said the 'baby boomers' represented a peak in economic growth--havent these folks heard of children????