RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


Pro Bull Riding more popular than cycling....?(14 posts)

Pro Bull Riding more popular than cycling....?joe1265
Oct 16, 2003 6:30 AM
After a great spring and summer of cycling coverage (Belgian classics, Giro, Tour++++) OLN seems to have dropped all their coverage. There's no more Thursday night coverage of the latest weekly race and SportsZone has been moved to 11pm.

Does Pro Bull Riding (PBR) really draw in more viewers than the Vuelta, Fall Classics or the Worlds (GASP!)?

Has anyone tried to get Eurosports or RAI on satellite TV?
Absolutely.Dropped
Oct 16, 2003 7:18 AM
I would bet pro bull riding pulls in 10 times the viewers cycling does, if not more. Remember, this is a country where professional wrestling and NASCAR are amongst the 3 most popular sports.

Hell, I bet women's cricket would outdraw cycling.
Absolutely.yeah right
Oct 16, 2003 7:44 AM
Actually, I think their ratings doubled in july during the tour coverage. Cycling coverage motivates a surprising number of people to watch.
It's overmohair_chair
Oct 16, 2003 7:19 AM
The season is done, except for one big event, the Tour of Lombardy. There's nothing to show, hence, bull riding.
What about the World Championships?ms
Oct 16, 2003 7:51 AM
I agree that the season NOW is over except for the Tour of Lombardy. But, OLN pulled the plug on cycling coverage two or three weeks ago. One would have thought that OLN would have given some coverage to the most significant cycling event to occur in North America in several years. But, maybe OLN feels that if Lance Armstrong is not in it, it doesn't really count as a draw for most viewers. I was very happy with OLN's cycling coverage in the spring and summer. I liked Summer Sports Zone (although a lot of bull (riding) was creeping into the coverage in September). I thought that OLN did a great job with the Giro and Tour. OLN began to fall down when it scaled back the Vuelta broadcasts. And, then, it just dropped all cycling coverage. Kind of reminds me of David Millar's performance at the Vuelta in 2002 -- did a great job, but stopped just short of the finish line.
Don't fault OLN...No_sprint
Oct 16, 2003 7:56 AM
I'm sure they would have loved to cover it. It could possibly have been that it was far too expensive for them. Furthermore, they might have been banned from airing it in Canada and lots of surrounding U.S. soil, because it could have drawn many away from coming and seeing it live.
Why not?ms
Oct 16, 2003 11:20 AM
I agree with you that a live broadcast in Eastern Canada and the Northeast and Midwest of the US may have depressed attendance. But, I find it hard to believe that it would have cost too much to buy some video footage and play it on the Thursday after the race (i.e., today). Also, many races are broadcast live in the place where they are held without impacting the live attendance. For, example, the USPRO race in Philadelphia is broadcast on local television live. I do not know, but I would assume that the 2002 Worlds in Zolder were broadcast live in Europe.
OK, fault them all you want...No_sprint
Oct 16, 2003 1:14 PM
They had no obligation to and I never heard any indication they had any intent to. We'll likely never know exactly why they didn't air anything. They might have not had any interest at all in covering it. There might be no footage to air as is the case of the grand tours.
I sent OLN a whiney e-maillitespeedchick
Oct 16, 2003 8:00 AM
about not being able to watch the Vuelta.

They actually responded... and not with a form-letter!Big kudos right there.

They said the Vuelta historically does not do as well in the ratings and thus no prime time re-air. But I still don't understand why they had to put the Sports Zone show on at 11:00!
You need a VCR or PVR or Tivo type system...No_sprint
Oct 16, 2003 8:05 AM
My PVR doesn't require a subscription. It's got 70 hours of digital recording and has completely changed the way I watch TV forever. No more commercials, etc. It's better OLN shows it somewhat live.
you mean I wouldn't get a Suburu printed on my retinas...litespeedchick
Oct 16, 2003 9:37 AM
during the TDF?

I'm waiting for my husband to spend HIS money on a Tivo. It's hard enough on a girl to have to spend money on bicycles when there are Kate Spade purses and Channel lip gloss to be bought ! :-)
bull riding probably costs less to showoff roadie
Oct 16, 2003 8:36 AM
Its gotta be cheaper to send a few cameras to an arena than to pay a bunch of guys on motorcycles to follow a race. Given an equal budget, the bull coverage is much more "photogenic". The format is also more commercial friendly and less confusing which may make for faster / cheaper editing.

So even with the same viewing audince / advertiser revenues, OLN could make more on bull riding.
You have a good pointNo_sprint
Oct 16, 2003 8:41 AM
OLN airs footage provided by others of the biggies. I doubt if they had to ship over helos, motos, personnel, get all the footage rights, buy out the Spanish and French and Italians who have purchased the footage rights, and would likely prefer death before giving up those rights, etc, that OLN would or could afford it.
re: Pro Bull Riding more popular than cycling....?seanf711
Oct 16, 2003 8:46 AM
I think the problem with cycling coverage compared to other sports coverage is that football and sports like that are viewed by people that do not play foot ball. You are talking about people that are more interested in watching a sport then playing it. I would bet that nearly all people that watch cycling are cyclists.