 | |
Nice write up for the IRL
Indy Car motor racing Discussions About Indy Car motor racing (rec.autos.sport.indy)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Nice write up for the IRL -
01-10-2007
, 11:13 PM
|
Wow, that's a lot of information. Do you have a source, or is just something that you think must be true? |
If you can't get enough from the barnyard, just read his posts. I can
hardly stop laughing.
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
Wow, that's a lot of information. Do you have a source, or is just something that you think must be true? |
In 2005 spike/TNN was the 10th largest cable channel tied with the
weather channel. This based on the number of cable outlets each channel
is a part of. Spike is a part of most if not almost all basic cable
and satelite packages. Our dear friend cannot understand this and often
reads something different than what was actually said. Such as i said
for almost 5 years spike/tnn had the number one rated show on cable. He
claims i said that for 5 years Spike/Tnn was bigger than ESPN. Until it
moved to the USA network in late 2005 WWE's Raw on spike/tnn was the
top rated cable show. So until late 2005 Spike/TNN did have the
number 1 cable show.
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
ncrdbl1 wrote: On Jan 10, 4:26?pm, xorbit <xor... (AT) nospam (DOT) ca> wrote: ncrdbl1 wrote: Very nice job by the ccws pr department to get this one oout so soon after the Miller article exposed the ccws short comings.Pleae provide credible linkage and backup for that speculation. Too bad the writer has exposed himself in his writings.Is the writer on the CCWS payroll? ?Please provide proof of this. ?A simple internet link to the facts will suffice. The remarks by the writers has shown he suffers from the same denial that so many ccws fans suffer from. I loved the portion of the article where he was speaking of the Koni challenges the series lack of TV coverage. Especially when he says the following ?"If ChampCar could spend 2004 on SpikeTV as they sought a better TV package, I'm sure something similar can be arranged for Koni Challenge on a similar cable outlet." ?What he fails to realize is that Spike is one of the largest cable stations there is. It's coverage area is almost as large as ESPN and is larger than ESPN2, where most likely the majority of the ccws events will be shown.Please provide a credible reference for this information.. ?Focus on 2004 Spike vs. ESPN vs. ESPN2 ratings prove your statement. For a period of around 5 years the number 1 show on cable was on Spike TV.Are you saying that Spike was more popular than ESPN for 5 years? ?Are you saying that 5 years ago Spike had a more popular show? ?Are you sayng that a show that was on Spike was more popular at a particular viewing time that a show on ESPN at the same or different viewing time. ? Please provide credible references and further information. ?Please be very specific. Note that "Spike" did not exist 5 years ago. Also note that the IRL is also on ESPN. ?It will be interesting to see which series gets the higher ratings and provides the better exposure value for its sponsors. At the same time the ccws was getting 0.1s and 0.2s on the same network. If the writer actually knew what he was talking about he would know these facts. Unfortunately he was just interesting in trying to take the attention away from the Miller article and it didn't matter if facts got in the way or not.Looks likethe two are completely independent of each other. ?What was said is actually the same thing that has been said for about 11 years with a few updates. ?How are you making that linkage? So are you that out of touch with reporting or just unable to follow events for the last 11 years or so. Are you even 11 years old yet? Sheesh are you sure you are not on something.Me on something? *You'rethe one drinking all the Kool-aid. The network known as spike today DID exist 5 years ago. It is the old Nashville network that after a couple of name changes was finally renamed Spike after it was purchased from Gaylord Entertainment.But you said it was "Spike" so you're wrong again. *You admit that Spike didn't even exist 5 years ago. It is still on almost every basic cable outlet today as it was when it was the Nashville network. The network first went on the air March 7th 1983. It is one of the networks that brought NASCAR Cup racing to the entire USA. The network was in the top 10 of all cable networks in 2005 with coverage in approx 88.1 million households. The top cable network in 2005 was the Discovery Channel with 89.7 million households. So do not give me the "CCWS' bad ratings were due to the network" bullcrap when the network the ccws was on was only 1.6 million households *off the top network in the USA and it's primary programing focus was on the young male 17-25I didn't say anything of the kind about bad network ratings - you did. You're obviously drinking too much of the Kool-aid. *Clouding your thinking. You failed to prove that it was more popular than ESPN or ESPN2 by providing references. So you're just a full of shit troll. But I'll keep you dancing on the string just for laughs.- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - |
Maybe i didn't prove it because i NEVER SAID IT. No one ever said that
spike was more popular than espn or espn2 . What was said was that
spike had the highest rated program on cable for years. WWF/WWE RAW was
on spike/TNN until it moved to the USA network and it was and still is
the highest rated cable networtk program. I stated that Spike/TNN is in
almost as many households as ESPN and in more than ESPN2. Your refusal
to accept it doesn't make it any less true.
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
Wow, that's a lot of information. Do you have a source, or is just something that you think must be true? |
even more recent numbers. More proof that spike/tnn is one of the
biggest networks on cable.
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/director...s/cable_tv.jsp Notice
that ESPN had 89,900,000 subscribers and spike 89,100,000. So the 0.1s
and 0.2s that the ccws got on spike should remain about the same when
they switch to espn and espn2.
#15
| |||
| |||
|
#16
| |||
| |||
|
|
Thanks for the cite. Perhaps in the future you could annotate your original posts so we know which assertions are supported and which assertions are stuff you made up. *It's gonna slow things down to query you after every post. |
intelligent way as you did. It is those such as our friend who behave
in a childish manner which my make my patience run thin. As far as the
writer of the article. Such glaring errors in knowing facts such as the
size of Spike's subscription base and his remarks about the network
show that he suffers from the same affliction as too many of today's so
called journalist. That is either being too lazy to verify facts or
choosing to ignore such facts to get the story to say what they wanted
it to say. Another possibility is that he wrote using talking points
(although false) presented to him by certain parties. Or possible in
his case, being someone who has a history in motorsports (mostly
sportscars) he felt that fact alone would make him an expert columnist.
Unfortunately he forgot rule 1 of journalism school which is to double
check your facts. Either way it brings into question his ability to
write factually..
#17
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Jan 10, 8:21?pm, "scottscottscott" <scottrevis... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: Wow, that's a lot of information. Do you have a source, or is just something that you think must be true? http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...lz1ablood.html In 2005 spike/TNN was the 10th largest cable channel tied with the weather channel. This based on the number of cable outlets each channel is a part of. Spike is a part of most if not almost all basic cable and satelite packages. Our dear friend cannot understand this and often reads something different than what was actually said. Such as i said for almost 5 years spike/tnn had the number one rated show on cable. He claims i said that for 5 years Spike/Tnn was bigger than ESPN. Until it moved to the USA network in late 2005 WWE's Raw on spike/tnn was the top rated cable show. So until late 2005 Spike/TNN did have the number 1 cable show. |
I think the problem is that you've been caught speculating too often
rather than posting facts. Many of the statements / opinions you've
made in the past are stated as if they were facts rather than suggesting
that they are your opinion.
So my opinion is that the problem isn't with the rest of the world, its
purely with your personal credibility. If you are continually
questioned to provide your sources, its your own fault.
In the specific point mentioned above, the Spike channel didn't even
exist in the timeframe you referenced (fact). Therefore, by not being
specific and making this error, you caused problems with the credibility
of your statements. So don't blame others for questioning you.
#18
| |||
| |||
|
|
ncrdbl1 wrote: On Jan 10, 8:21?pm, "scottscottscott" <scottrevis... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: Wow, that's a lot of information. Do you have a source, or is just something that you think must be true? http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...lz1ablood.html In 2005 spike/TNN was the 10th largest cable channel tied with the weather channel. This based on the number of cable outlets each channel is a part of. Spike is a part of most if not almost all basic cable and satelite packages. Our dear friend cannot understand this and often reads something different than what was actually said. Such as i said for almost 5 years spike/tnn had the number one rated show on cable. He claims i said that for 5 years Spike/Tnn was bigger than ESPN. Until it moved to the USA network in late 2005 WWE's Raw on spike/tnn was the top rated cable show. So until late 2005 Spike/TNN did have the number 1 cable show. I think the problem is that you've been caught speculating too often rather than posting facts. Many of the statements / opinions you've made in the past are stated as if they were facts rather than suggesting that they are your opinion. So my opinion is that the problem isn't with the rest of the world, its purely with your personal credibility. If you are continually questioned to provide your sources, its your own fault. In the specific point mentioned above, the Spike channel didn't even exist in the timeframe you referenced (fact). Therefore, by not being specific and making this error, you caused problems with the credibility of your statements. So don't blame others for questioning you. |
If we used your logic then your dad must have went on his honeymoon a
new born baby girl because your mom's name changed and the person he
went on the honeymoon with did not exist before their wedding. When
growing up i drank Nestle's Quik now kids drink NesQuik. It is the same
product it wasn't magically created on the day they changed the name of
the product. Pure oil was the official fuel of NASCAR. When they
changed their name to Union 76 it didn't change how long they had been
the official fuel of NASCAR. Spike and TNN are the same channel and a
name change does not change the size of the network or how long it had
been on the air.
#19
| |||
| |||
|
|
Cal when your mom married your dad most likely she took his last name. If we used your logic then your dad must have went on his honeymoon a new born baby girl because your mom's name changed and the person he went on the honeymoon with did not exist before their wedding. When growing up i drank Nestle's Quik now kids drink NesQuik. It is the same product it wasn't magically created on the day they changed the name of the product. Pure oil was the official fuel of NASCAR. When they changed their name to Union 76 it didn't change how long they had been the official fuel of NASCAR. Spike and TNN are the same channel and a name change does not change the size of the network or how long it had been on the air. |
You are truly a pathetic soul. For your own sake, try to get some
professional help.
#20
| |||
| |||
|
|
ncrdbl1 wrote: Cal when your mom married your dad most likely she took his last name. If we used your logic then your dad must have went on his honeymoon a new born baby girl because your mom's name changed and the person he went on the honeymoon with did not exist before their wedding. When growing up i drank Nestle's Quik now kids drink NesQuik. It is the same product it wasn't magically created on the day they changed the name of the product. Pure oil was the official fuel of NASCAR. When they changed their name to Union 76 it didn't change how long they had been the official fuel of NASCAR. Spike and TNN are the same channel and a name change does not change the size of the network or how long it had been on the air.You are truly a pathetic soul. *For your own sake, try to get some professional help. |
delusional world where any news that does not fit a certain point of
view is met with snide remarks and personal attacks. You can argue your
beliefs any way you want and you will be wrong. But all that arguments
cannot change one simple fact. The fact that you refuse to accept and
look for any way to rationalize not having to accept. That is the CCWS
was on a network of almost 90 million subscribers and could only draw
ratings of 0.1 and 0.2. Your ego will not allow you to accept that even
the almighty LBGP the crown jewel of Champcar, on a network with almost
90 million subscribers was watched by only 64,000 households one year.
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.