The need to feel important is universal. When it is satisfied via rational and healthy means, it is called self-esteem. But sports fandom is inherently irrational. There is no evidence to suggest that the success of favored teams and competitors is in any way correlated with the relative social desirability of their fans.
Social psychologists refer to self-aggrandizement as illusory superiority, a distorted opinion of one's social standing.
I happen to be a fan of the Indianapolis Colts. If the Colts should win the Super Bowl this season, then I will likely feel a sense of aggrandizement, as if I had something to do with the team's achievement. The illusion is one that I will be happy to indulge. The academic literature suggests that I am not alone.
The Jersey Effect
Don't bother looking up the name of this particular affliction; I made it up.
The Jersey Effect is the term that I use to describe the inherent marketing advantage that is enjoyed by sports in which the participants represent either a community or an institution.
For example, I do not identify myself as an NFL fan, but rather as an Indianapolis Colts fan. The NFL does not have to compete for my allegiance because it is effectively an economic cartel, a monopolistic Not-for-Profit institution that operates for the benefit of its 32 member franchises. Economists have reached the same conclusion regarding Major League Baseball, the NBA, the NHL, and the NCAA.
Fans of sports that are sanctioned by those organizations tend to be devoted to a single member franchise or institution. They identify not with the economic institution, but rather with the Jersey of a single competitive entity. These fans are aggrandized when the guys (or gals) in their favorite jersey are successful.
In my opinion, there is but one example of The Jersey Effect in all of motorsports. That, of course, is the Prancing Horse of Scuderia Ferrari. A good number of Formula 1 fans are in fact Ferrari fans. That the vast majority of those fans will never own a Ferrari is evidence of the inherent irrationality of their fandom. Ferraris are the fast and sexy trophies of the elite. Scuderia Ferrari therefore offers the many who are not elite a parasocial connection to the few who are.
Of course the connection is an illusion. But that does not make it any less real to those who choose to indulge themselves.
The Sanctioning Body Effect
Citizen John provided a comment in this space some time ago that really got me thinking. He noted that U.S. auto racing fans have traditionally demonstrated a strange and disproportionately strong connection to one sanctioning body or another. Having given the matter much thought, I tend to agree.
Might it be that the Sanctioning Body Effect is to racing what The Jersey Effect is to other sports? Is this the foundation upon which fans base their self-aggrandizement? I believe that a very compelling case can be made.
NASCAR
It's where the Big Boys race. NASCAR Fan is cool because his sanctioning body is by far the most popular in the United States. It's where all of the best American drivers go to prove themselves. The cars are heavy, have skinny tires, and are difficult to drive. It's macho and nostalgic. The fact that the fancy-shmancy folks in New York and San Francisco don't like it is only further proof that it's the best.
ALMS
It's only for the smart, sophisticated and successful. ALMS Fan is cool because he likes what the socioeconomic winners like. NASCAR is the WWE and Wal-Mart. ALMS is the PGA and Saks. The cars are expensive, technologically advanced, and they race on road and street courses. Some events are even in major cities. It's for the hip, urban and successful. The fact that ALMS has a very small fan base is only further proof that it is superior. You can't be better than the crowd if you are the crowd, you know?
The IRL Effect
If there is such a thing as The IRL Effect, then we can say with certainty that it is not a source of aggrandizement. NASCAR has the best and most popular U.S. drivers and teams. Formula 1 has the best and most popular international drivers and teams. The cars are neither technologically interesting nor particularly difficult to drive. They are also essentially the same, the lone exception being that cars that are better financed are consistently faster than the others. The series appears to race wherever it can collect a check that is large enough to cover its costs. IndyCar is a relic, a once mighty warship that was decommissioned long ago.
The IRL Customer is aggrandized only at the Indianapolis 500, a storied institution that has managed to retain some luster despite its obvious decline in popularity. The market has made clear that the season championship is irrelevant. The few who continue to follow the sport do so primarily because they continue to associate themselves with the perception of a glorious past.
Aggrandizement: Core Benefit and Job to Get Done
IndyCar must become a source of aggrandizement to those who follow it. Watching an IndyCar race must indicate something - something that is irrationally great and desirable - about those who choose to either attend or watch on television. Every human being wants to feel that he or she is better than others. IndyCar needs to help some of them get that job done.
We should note that, although it is true the hunger for aggrandizement is universal, it is also true that not all people are satisfied by the same foods. Therefore, IndyCar must choose. It can not be everything to everyone, but it must be something to someone. Serving one market will likely require that we not serve others.
IndyCar must assist customers with the job of self-aggrandizement. It must give them reason to feel bigger, more important, and superior in some way. But how?
Which product attributes will help IndyCar customers get the job of self-aggrandizement done?
I look forward to reading your comments.
Roggespierre
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Might it be that the Sanctioning Body Effect is to racing what The Jersey Effect is to other sports?
ReplyDeleteI don't think so. A “Sanctioning Body Effect” can also be found in MLB with American/National league fans, NFC/AFC in NFL, ACC vs Big East basketball, and elsewhere.
There are NASCAR fans as there are NFL fans, which then eventually split into “jersey fans” - for Junior, Jimmy, and Jeff, Ford, Chevy and Dodge. We all see the jackets, caps and t-shirts, and the other bric-a-brac people buy, wear and display - and that sponsors actuate – regardless of sport. Heck, one can see local sport celebrities, many from the past, endorsing banks, fast food, and car dealerships on TV almost everywhere.
The IRL Customer is aggrandized only at the Indianapolis 500.
You have it reversed. The few IRL customers are necessarily aggrandized by the series or there would be no viewership or ticket sales outside IMS. The 500 fans and their "aggrandizement," once again, are clearly independent (and perhaps in spite) of any IRL affiliation, but the IRL's notoriety is wholly dependent on the 500, as amply demonstrated by the demise of CART, et al. BMT, it is irrational how any CART fan can profess an attraction to the 500 while eschewing (often denigrating) other ovals in favor of road/street courses. Frankly, I see bandwagon jumping in that - the 500 demands props, or you're suspect as a "real fan." Wasn't that way in 1996 at Michigan.
Every human being wants to feel that he or she is better than others.
I think it is less about aggrandizement than group identification and membership. Show up at Yankee Stadium in Red Sox swag, and one takes pride in the banter between rival fans. Show up in Royals attire and you're ignored. Show up at Lambeau Field with a cheesehead and you're eating and drinking in the parking lot as part of a community. Show up there in a Titans jersey and you're mostly eating unmolested. It's less about “better” than “belonging” - and that extends to the 500, where everyone is family sharing an historic event wrapped in tradition.
BTW: I'm a Milwaukee Bucks fan...winning and losing is immaterial at this point. Aggrandizement way out of the picture.
Which product attributes will help IndyCar customers get the job of self-aggrandizement done?
IMHO, it's all about viable fan communities. The IRL doesn't have one, and hasn't the wherewithal to develop one. Most teams and drivers have none. The 500 as an event has a community, and it is clearly the exception.
The Jersey Effect
ReplyDeleteI think we have isolated a major problem for the IRL--it has no “effect” Jersey or otherwise.
The “500” did and to an extent it still does.
Bill France was able to tie a series to the Daytona 500, but with the CART/IRL debacle the tie to the Indy 500 was lost.
If the Indy 500 can be reenergized (which means a much modified formula) the IRL or it’s successor might be able to create a Jersey Effect---but first the “500” must be once again the pinnacle of racing in the US.
I am convinced that without a complete redo of the car; and I mean a total revision of what the car looks like, sounds like, and drives like, the IRL will fail.
So I see it as the first attribute we must address and if it can be done within a budget that allows for new teams to join and sell sponsorships the rest will follow. To accomplish this means an “open formula”; whoever wants to build a car that meets a standard must be allowed to do so. Multiple chassis, multiple engines, even varied fuels must all be allowed.
Even NASCAR is beginning to question the decision to make every car be the same. The truck series next year is allowing “spec engines”---just a step, but an important one.
Our problem is the people who run the IRL have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, and until the IMS management (our only true hope) decides to jettison the IRL, we’ll be talking to ourselves. But without a plan that could be proposed to the Speedway when that day arrives, and I am confident it will, the IndyCar racing we all remember and visualize for the future will remain a dream!
osca
I think for the series to allow the fan to feel self-aggrandized, it must provide events that are memorable or newsworthy so that the fan/viewer can later say "I was there!", or "I saw it happen!".
ReplyDelete"I was there when AJ won his fourth!!!" is the one that got me, and many have been added since. Unfortunately the memorable moments are mostly from the Speedway, with a few exceptions... Danica at Motegi, Andretti passes Andretti on Father's Day, Inagural US 500 (I laughed until I cried, still have the start on tape).
So I guess what I am saying is that we need to make each race important (bigger purses, daredevil drivers) and not only promote it beforehand, but tell everyone how great it was afterwards as well.
-indyian
Rocketman53,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your thoughtful and constructive comments.
That said, I would argue that in team sports, the Community is secondary to The Jersey Effect. For example, I tend to prefer the AFC to the NFC. This is likely due to the fact that the Colts happen to be in the AFC.
Try to find a National League fan Boston. You will have little success. I would argue that Boston is an American League town because the Red Sox are an American League team.
Did the Seattle Seahawks lose a significant number of fans when they moved from the AFC to the NFC? I see little evidence to suggest such a thing. Similarly, Virginia Tech did not seem to lose fans as a result of its move from the Big East to the ACC.
Perhaps we can synthesize our views. Could it be that the Community Effect that you site - and that I fully agree exists and is very powerful - is based on The Jersey in team sports? I would accept that argument.
Your note about being a Milwaukee Bucks fan is interesting. I'll use the Washington Redskins as my example because I happen to live nearby.
The Redskins stink. They generate and spend tons of money. Management is clearly incompetent. Still, I would argue that Redskins fans are aggrandized. Why? Because there isn't a single person in the DC area who doesn't think that he or she could do a better job running than Daniel Snyder and Vinny Cerrato. Fantasy Football is aggrandizement: we'll never get an opportunity to demonstrate that we really could do it better, but we all believe that we would if given the chance.
This blog is similar. I will be clear for those who have yet to detect my source of aggrandizement.
I know that I would do a much better job than Angstadt, Barnhart and Cotman if I were given a chance to run the IndyCar Series. Of course I will never get that chance. But I am aggrandized by every word that I publish at The Indy Idea.
From what I can tell, I am not alone. I think that everyone here believes that he could do a better job than current management. We'll never know if we're right, but at least we have put fingers to keyboard and demonstrated that we're thinking seriously about it. That alone would seem to be an improvement.
Thus, a community has been created. Almost everyone who visits this blog is 1) a regular who visits at least once per day, and 2) a participant in the discussion.
Check the IndyCar racing message boards. They're populated by people who are similar to us - people who think that they know how to do it better. That's the IndyCar Community - fans who are aggrandized by the ineptitude of management.
It's a distorted example of The Sanctioning Body Effect, but I think that the model still holds. Unfortunately, the number of those who are aggrandized by such activity is quite small.
I look forward to further comments from you and others.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
There's a lot of good stuff in here, but I'd like to moderate some points.
ReplyDeleteFirst, the nature of stick and ball team sports is different than that of motor sport. While I like the analogy of Ferrari to (pick your team - Indiana Pacers, for example), I don't see the emotional connection ending there. In fact, I believe the connection is substantially different. In motor sport fans are more likely to make an emotional connection to Valentino Rossi, Lewis Hamilton, Jimmy Johnson or Smoke than the teams they race for. We all know Danica merchandise is a viable business and that is not because they like the black, blue or orange colors that may be utilized.
That said, I don't discount the association with NASCAR, Formula One or Le Mans. (I'm skeptical that ALMS has a following if not for Le Mans, much as the IRL would lose the weak support it has without the Indy 500). I still and will continue to contend that aside from an association with Indy 500, the IRL stands for nothing - it owns no market space. Osca has it right: part of the solution is a completely new, distinctive formula.
Second, I agree with Rocketman that a sense of belonging is at least as important as aggrandizement. Both are jobs that have to be accomplished effectively. We want people to want to feel a part of our sport - engage it. This is the point I made earlier in the week - and it has never been more apparent than in this social networking world.
TC,
ReplyDeleteIn general, I agree with both you and Rocketman. IndyCar DOES need to create a Community. That is another Job that customers are clearly trying to get done.
But comparative social desirability is a very strong driver of human behavior. Yes, people want to be part of a Community. But they also want to perceive themselves as being better than others. I would argue that The Sanctioning Body Effect, in its purest form, provides the Core Benefit that allows some people to get that Job done. It makes them feel superior in some way with regard to those who are not part of that community.
We tend not to be picky. That is why we tend to overrate our abilities in simple tasks - social psychologists often use the example of driving a car. Something like 80% of those who have licenses believe that their driving abilities are "above average". This, of course, can not in fact be true.
Those who believe themselves to be sophisticated and successful because they follow F1 and ALMS are tend to be neither. You won't find many PhDs and hedge fund billionaires at a typical ALMS race, for example. Similarly, NASCAR's popularity does not indicate that the Southeastern United States is somehow superior to the rest of the country. It does not confirm that Red State values are better than Blue State values.
But again, it doesn't matter. Aggrandizement is a distortion. It is irrational.
As marketers, our job is not to judge the drivers of customer behavior. Instead, we observe, analyze, and draw conclusions in a dispassionate manner. We then craft a product that will appeal to some of the irrationalities, biases, and base passions that we might rather not discuss. In some ways, giving people what they really want can be a dirty job.
We will get to Community. I promise. I called it Participation and Belonging, but the meaning is the same.
Incidentally, I suspect that you have given this notion much thought in your normal course of business. Allow me to suggest a book that you really should read if you have not done so already.
It is Robert Putnam's "Bowling Alone". It's all about spontaneous sociability and its general downward trend contemporary society. It is extremely well researched and, in my opinion, instructive.
Osca and IndyIan,
I don't mean to cheat you. I will respond. But I'm hammering at the keyboard while watching college football. The Badgers are manhandling my Boilermakers. But I assure you that your comments are highly valued. I will address them.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
"R"
ReplyDeleteI am an Ohio resident but cheer for the Gators (two grandkids graduated from UF).
So after 3:30 it is football.
In fact I cheer for Florida, and for whoever is playing Ohio State, Michigan and ND!
osca
The nature of stick and ball team sports is different than that of motor sport.
ReplyDeleteIt’s not the nature of “stick and ball team sports” – it’s the common nature of all competition. Few watch any contest without seizing a favorite. It’s that way for the ugliest dog to “Dancing with the Stars” to TV poker tournaments and grandmaster chess. It’s putting two bucks down on the nose of the 90-1 gray horse. What draws anyone to something is a mystery, irrational, and the instinct is powerful. Why do folks with no knowledge of curling become rabid fans during an Olympics? If it’s merely national identity, why does that not carry over to A1GP or soccer?
“I would argue that Boston is an American League town because the Red Sox are an American League
I would generally agree, and that’s not the point. If you’re not a fan of baseball, you’re not a fan of MLB…either league…any team – no matter where you live. And if you live in New York, Chicago, or LA –even the DC/Baltimore metro, you have a choice. And when the “other choice” does well, it’s easy to jump onto the bandwagon, if just temporarily, to join the cooler community. It’s simple group dynamics at work. People either identify with a community and try to join, or they find something else – most fans, IMO, being bandwagon riders when the opportunity presents itself. Again, look at 1996, the expectations, and the aftereffects of that Memorial Day weekend. Had the US 500 been a clean event and won by an established Indy star (Unser, Andretti, or Emmo, for example) there would likely have been a settlement within a year or two. Instead you had two "losers" as defined by the press coverage - and neither ever recovered. Now it's all a third-rate mess, with TG's departure further proof of that status.
“Fantasy Football is aggrandizement: we'll never get an opportunity to demonstrate that we really could do it better, but we all believe that we would if given the chance.”
Fantasy sports are competition with other fans, often for the purpose of winning cash or trash.
“Check the IndyCar racing message boards. They're populated by people who are similar to us."
That’s not my experience – I have yet to see anyone here being trollish or otherwise behaving badly.
Example of the distinction between "participate/belong" and "aggrandizement":
ReplyDeleteFor example, I root for Vitor Meira (Why? Who really knows). I don't feel connected to any community AT ALL by doing so. However, when he pulled of the pass at Indy in 2008, I was "proud" to be pulling for him. Of course, this is illusory self-aggrandizement, as I had no more to do with Vitor's great move than the guy sitting next to me in the stands.
Anyway, here are some product elements that seem to me to have the potential to aggrandize fans:
1) American drivers - clearly highly important, doesn't fit into the "Sanctioning Body Effect" as neatly as other attributes. Perhaps this will be easier if we consider the fan aggrandizement derived from "what our drivers do" (Sanctioning Body Effect) separately from that derived from "who our drivers are"?
I don't know - if you've got an idea of how you want to handle this, Roggespierre, lead on!
2) Relative speed - "my series is the fastest"
3) Cars at the limit - "the drivers in my series have superior skills...and some big brass ones"
4) Cars that are not all D/H/F - "my series is a competition between engineers, manufacturers, and mechanics [that is manifested visually, unlike NASCAR where all cars look identical]"
5) Rules and regulations that culture a sense of forward progress (innovation etc.) - "my series is continually evolving because of the fierce, multifaceted competition."
BC,
ReplyDeleteYou and I are thinking in concert. IndyCar must be BETTER than its alternatives so that its fans might be aggrandized. Such is the nature of market competition.
Customers must believe that their investment in IndyCar racing suggests something positive about them in comparison with others. They're not just smart for liking it; they're smarter than those who do not.
Take a quick glance at CW - the unabashedly anti-IRL website. The members of that community like road racing and international participation. This clearly makes them feel superior to the "Gomers" who prefer ovals and American drivers. Conversely, early IRL fans rallied around the notion that "their" American drivers would prove to be at least as good if only they might get a chance to drive competitive equipment.
In 1996, both CART and the IRL were more popular than IndyCar is today. Check the TV ratings and attendance for both if you don't believe me. The Sanctioning Body Effect became a cause. Today's IndyCar Series appeals to almost nobody. Fans of the twisties hate the cars and the fact that the IMS owns the series. Oval fans don't care about the drivers and hate most of the circuits.
The IRL was a significant market disruption. I would argue that it remains the most powerful market force with regards to IndyCar racing.
We are left with two viable alternatives, in my view. We can either 1) serve either the twisty market or the oval market and say goodnight to the other, or 2) change the playing field entirely. The New Day Rising project is all about pursuit of Option #2.
Your examples of possible superlative product attributes are exactly the types of things that I have in mind. Changing the game means changing the attributes upon which the product is judged. It is a competitive market strategy.
Again, thank you for the valuable input.
Best Regard,
Roggespierre
Rocketman53,
ReplyDeleteI don't disagree with you regarding the nature of all sports. However, I will say that every sport must have some product attribute that convinces you to pay attention. Do you believe that there is a uniform attribute of competition that is strong enough to get that job done? I will admit that I do not. Therein lies the differentiation between The Jersey Effect and The Sanctioning Body Effect.
That, I would argue, is why people bother to watch most Olympic sports. This seems to be particularly true in the United States. I understand that Usain Bolt draws huge ratings in Europe whenever he participates in an event. That is not the case here. Americans will care about him again when the 2012 Olympics come around.
In this case, it is the sanctioning body - The Olympic Games - that is the driver of U.S. consumer interest. Once tuned in, Americans will marvel at Bolt's superhuman talent. And then they will forget about him again for another four years.
Nobody is marveling at the skill of the Washington Redskins. But The Jersey Effect will ensure that the locals will continue to tune in. They will also watch other NFL games, particularly those that involve teams in the NFC East, the division that they care most about because the Redskins happen to be in it.
Fantasy Football is about competition with other fans. I don't disagree. But what does that competition entail? It is an attempt at aggrandizement. If I win, then it's because I'm smarter than you.
The gambling aspect is another matter entirely. Most research into the subject, at least that of which I am aware, indicates that gamblers seek not aggrandizement, but rather a sort of "rush" that is brought about by various attitudes in anticipation of either winning or losing. I did some work with an organization that was started by Art Schlichter's wife. In my experience, real gamblers avoid the smart, safe play. They stay away when the spread is clearly out of whack. If they were seeking aggrandizement, then that would not be true.
You're right about the nature of discourse here, and I am glad for it. For example, you and I disagree from time to time. But I recognize that your arguments are well-reasoned and non-threatening. You force me to reconsider and at times alter and refine my own views. That is exactly the type of forum that I envisioned when I began this exercise.
Incidentally, this affords me a measure of aggrandizement. I certainly do not have the most popular IndyCar site on the web, but I do think that it's the best site because participants here provide reasoned contributions. That everyone here acts like an adult is a source of pride.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
IndyIan,
ReplyDeleteI agree completely. VirtualBalboa has written it many times, as well. Each race must be BIG. Each event must be important on its own merits.
The Indy 500 certainly has a head start with respect to the rest of the schedule, but it, too, must be reinvigorated.
I think that "track diversity" might have a role to play. I would suggest that we hang each event on a hook that makes that event special. Perhaps Texas should be the only night race, for example. The 500 was originally conceived as an endurance race. Why should the National Driving Championship include such an event, even if it is not at Indy? Why not have two, one at an oval and one at a road course? If we're going to have street races, then why not make one of those an enduro? Let's add a true short track - one that is .5 mile or less. Why not race clockwise on an oval, too? If I thought that we could devise a formula that could handle a rally and a hill climb, then I would add those, as well.
Every event is special. The drivers are the BEST because winning the National Driving Championship necessarily means driving competitively in all types of conditions.
Would that not change the playing field? Would fans of the National Driving Championship not be aggrandized, knowing that the competitors in "their" sport must be able to do it all and that they, as fans, are sophisticated enough to appreciate the magnitude of such diversified competition?
The formula is another matter, but the thinking that should guide it is similar, in my view.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
Hmmm....
ReplyDeleteLet's not get lost in the weeds here. I like defining the jobs, but I'm not sure debating the details is all that helpful or instructive.
I'll bite that aggrandizement and community are two distinct (but related jobs). I never intended to suggest they weren't, I was just interpreting the dialogue was largely dismissing community. If we recognize that job and will develop it later, I'm on board.
As for the distinction between stick and ball and motor sport, let me try to be clearer. For motor sport, the performance of an individual - in particular the driver - trumps everything else. Yes there is allegiance to branded forms of auto racing (for aggrandizement but also a sense of community), but certainly within those contexts, the driver trumps everything. That is part of the reason why Danica (and to a lesser extent, Helio) transcends IndyCar. This is important as we consider the marketing of the sport and the selection of American drivers. A longer list of appealing drivers can elevate the sport overall, IMHO.
"R," you scare me a bit when you start talking about road courses. The more road courses on the schedule, the more you favor foreign drivers. Also, I would suggest that it smacks of trying to be everything - and when you are everything, you're nothing. IndyCar suffers a bit from that now.
TC
I think that diversity of tracks and course styles would make an outstanding backdrop for the series...imagine a season that had the cars on the oval at Daytona, and then the next week on the road course. At Motegi and then Suzuka. At Indy on the road course the first week in May and then the 500 3 weeks later. Same thing with Las Vegas and some others. And in my perfect world, at the Nurburgring GP circut and then the Nurburgring Nordschleife the following week. Make these events tie into each other and create drama.
ReplyDeleteWhat other tracks do we dream of?
-indyian
Indyian:
ReplyDeleteI refer you to my previous post. What you are talking about is what we have now on steroids. This needs to be an oval-based series. The only compromise I would find reasonable would be an agree-upon percentage, perhaps 10% road/street course. In other words, with a schedule of 20 races, two on road courses. Less than 20, limit it to one road race.
Additional road races will kill off any chance of having a series of predominately American drivers. To take your suggestion to its extreme, let's have a few dirt ovals.
That said, we have dived deep into the weeds. I'm good with fleshing out the job attributes, so let's spell out what it takes to achieve aggrandizement.
TC
Roggespierre said:
ReplyDeleteWould that not change the playing field? Would fans of the National Driving Championship not be aggrandized, knowing that the competitors in "their" sport must be able to do it all and that they, as fans, are sophisticated enough to appreciate the magnitude of such diversified competition?
You know, if by some audacious coup a series of events as "undeniably awesome" as the one you suggest could be put together, I'd be very excited.
Though I would definitely take TC's side if a gauntlet was thrown down today on the matter, given what seems realistic based on my knowledge of the matter. But this is a discussion for a future day anyway, right?
Oh! I've thought of a possibly much better way to describe the product attribute of the series that involves having American drivers (my #1 above):
1) Clearly American - "My series is a uniquely American pursuit. Racing series in other countries aren't doing what my series is doing."
This is a source of aggrandizement that alludes to the need for American drivers but is series-centric and not driver-centric (so we're distinguishing between the Sanctioning Body Effect and the, oh, "3,24,88 Effect"). The series must be an American game. That anyone who is not an American competes in it must be perceived as an endorsement of IndyCar as a superior product. "They" must come to compete in "our" series.
If we are to be able to make it undeniably "our" series, the problem of having American drivers to root for (3,24,88) must by default be solved. And maybe certain marketing strategies will maximize the ability of fans to acheive further self-aggrandizement via allegiance to specific drivers (3,24,88)...but with a pool of American drivers competing in a clearly top-class series, this will not be too difficult.
That is part of the reason why Danica (and to a lesser extent, Helio) transcends IndyCar.
ReplyDeleteI vehemently disagree with this. Danica's inital burst of popularity came because she is a female; she had "human interest" appeal. I dare even say "freakshow" appeal. I know, that's a negative way of describing the rush to be in her fan base. But its not a dishonest description. People watched the Indy 500 and subsequent races to her arrival because she was a woman and consider a legitimate competitor. There was literally no other reason. She had the possibility to bring Indycar back to some credibility if she had become as successful as was hoped (i.e. winning multiple races, regularly fighting for wins, winning at Indy), but thus far its not happened and it seems less and less likely as time moves forward. The general public has recognized that and moved on. I would compare her in that sense to Kimbo Slice (youtube cagefighter who's been great for ratings...but won't be for much longer), numerous horses who've won the first two legs of the Triple Crown (anyone remember Charismatic or Sunday Silence?), Michelle Wie, Freddy Adu, and a bunch of other names who created good initial interest by the general public, failed to make the hyped impact, and have faded into memory, even if they're still active. Hell, in the case of Adu and Wie, still not even in their physical primes.
Helio, of course, was on a reality show. Now, maybe having Will Power on Survivor would make him a more well known name among the general public than it was in prior years. Almost assuredly likely, in fact. How does that translate to creating long term Indycar fans? Well, that answer's a lot harder.
I also continue to disagree that this needs to be pushed as being "Uniquely American". You can't go head to head with NASCAR on that. I'm sorry. The fan base won't buy it. It would be like trying to sell Wu-Tang Clan albums to Clint Black fans by arguing that Method Man and Clint Black both like to act and they all enjoy a good kung fu movie. Outside the box, people. What do people who aren't watching racing right now currently criticize it for? That's who you need to woo.
VB: I agree with you, the form of the racing is "uniquely American" but as I pointed out in an email to Roggespierre, IndyCar does not exist in a vacuum. I fear if we keep insisting on it being a "North American oval-centric" series that we run the very real risk of being perceived by the rest of the motor sports world as being a marginal series. I have proposed on another fan forum site that we revive the "Triple Crown". My suggestion was the "Triple Crown" would consist of the Indy 500, a 500 mile race on a 2 mile oval and a 500km road race. This affords a sense of aggrandizement that this series forces drivers to have a diverse set of skills and also creates two interelated story lines. One; the Championship points race, and two; the suspense of who will take the Triple Crown? Especially if the TC winner gets a check for $1.5mil over and above the prize monies won for the event. I grew up a fan of F1 and IndyCar racing. When CART broke from USAC I liked the mix of ovals and road courses. I still think that model has merit. It was the arrogance and greed of the CART management as well as some absolutely monumental blunders in marketing by that same management led to the crisis we find ourselves today.
ReplyDeleteR said: “Every sport must have some product attribute that convinces you to pay attention. Do you believe that there is a uniform attribute of competition that is strong enough to get that job done?”
ReplyDeleteYes, every contest is potentially compelling for the “struggle” to its outcome. Any will draw fans. Better promoted and packaged ones will draw more fans faster. The best will create better competitive conditions: Olymic swimmers in shark suits; the NFL adjusting rules from year to year; MLB using the All-Star game as a “coin flip” for the World Series and adding HR Derby to the spectacle.
“In this case, it is the sanctioning body - The Olympic Games - that is the driver of U.S. consumer interest.”
Let’s recognize that NBC, McDonalds and the zillion other “official sponsors” go balls-to-the-wall with hugely expensive, ubiquitous promotion in the run-up to the games to create a viewership community around every water cooler -- and then for them to bask in the reflected glory of these ever-increasingly commercial games. They essentially form an echo chamber that drives a self-fulfilling commercial prophesy.
Is it sport, or the “need to see” spectacle that draws a “casual viewer” to sports/games that otherwise generate no better than niche interest for the other 3.9 years? What we know is, once a viewership community forms, even curling becomes a big deal, if for a fleeting few weeks. I pay attention, and now I can join in with the dudes around the water cooler…which is a form of aggrandizement driven by that membership.
Now, draw the parallel to the IRL and the 500. The IRL cannot act as your “sanctioning body” in this context, i.e. the validator of general importance. The IRL is clearly subordinate to the 500 – IF the connection is a) made by the public, and b) considered worthwhile. Any SBE associated with the IRL is miniscule, if not negative.
The “Jersey Effect” within IRL is also minimal. Part of it has to do with the history of the IRL, Penske and Ganassi, the hesitance of CART fans to support TG’s Runination of "AWOR" (just substitute CART), and the “traitor” factor associated with these ex-CART teams on both sides of the divide. Isn’t it odd that the fans’ perennial most popular is… American…WOO/USAC background …female…never won a race…doesn’t pose in SI…runs on a shoestring…represents a low-brow sponsor…Sarah Fisher? So wear her t-shirt to work and…what? Nothing – there is no community, no aggrandizement. You might do better with “Power by Honda.” In fact, the IRL pitches more of its swag at events than anything else…and it sits on hangars.
“The Jersey Effect will ensure that the locals will continue to tune in” (to the Redskins).
“Dave Hoskins did something a week ago he had never done in eight years of going to Redskins games: He didn't go to the Redskins game.” – Washington Post 10/26/09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/25/AR2009102502646.html
Redskins suck. Plenty of good seats are available, and below face at the game. Snyder is even papering. How many you want?
IMHO, there are three levels of fan: The fanatic, the casual fan, and the bandwagon fan. The IRL has a few in the fanatic category any way you slice it, and virtually none of the other two.
TC said: “People watched the Indy 500 and subsequent races to (Danica's) arrival because she was a woman and consider a legitimate competitor…. The general public has recognized (her lack of wins) and moved on.”
I would argue the flip side – that the “bandwagon” and many casual fans have moved on. They generally do. (Ask R about the Redskins.) Danica undeniably has the biggest corps of fanatics among IRL drivers. Purists dislike it, I suspect, because they see other, more worthy drivers being ignored. Dan Wheldon is exhibit A, reduced to wearing that sour grapes t-shirt for attention. Was Danica “overhyped?” I don’t think so, not as a driver. Nonetheless, it’s all the IRL has: Her and Helio.
GM said: “IndyCar does not exist in a vacuum.”
ReplyDeleteYeah, actually, it pretty much does. And that presents opportunity…if anyone wants to invest. Right now, no one does.
“I fear if we keep insisting on it being a "North American oval-centric" series that we run the very real risk of being perceived by the rest of the motor sports world as being a marginal series.”
Risk? It's already a marginal series - only one that features an iconic (and diminishing) race.
Guys, don't forget about all the other categories besides just "aggrandizement"! Arguing about series track composition is useless until we define the full range of jobs which that product attribute must fulfill.
ReplyDeleteGM,
My argument is this:
With respect to fan aggrandizement, the perception MUST be that the game we play is an American endeavor. The details will be hammered out in due course, but without a clearly American identity IndyCar is rudderless in the US market.
Do you disagree with this general argument?
I have to say, BC, you consistently offer common sense ideas that people need to think about. Or maybe that's just because I find myself agreeing with you. Yes, IndyCar needs an American identity or all is lost.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that debating venue at this juncture puts us off course. But the issue is fundamental and will have to resolved. That's what I mean when I say we are deep in the weeds.
What I'd like to do is identify what are the drivers of aggrandizement, although I will defer to "R" if he has another approach - he built this house. So....
If the job is aggrandizement, what are the elements that make it so?
Let me suggest a few:
*Drivers the target consumer can relate to.
*A world-class series that takes a back seat to none other.
*Cool cars that target consumer puts on their fantasy list when asked about what they'd like to own.
*Big events that are "places to see or be seen."
That's a start.
One final thing, Rocketman:
(TC said: “People watched the Indy 500 and subsequent races to (Danica's) arrival because she was a woman and consider a legitimate competitor…. The general public has recognized (her lack of wins) and moved on.”)
I did not say this and most certainly do not agree. I believe this was Balboa.
TC
But how do we make the series uniquely American?
ReplyDeleteIs running only on American tracks, ovals specifically, going to help?
Using American engines is also a thought. I love the sound of an Offy in the morning. But aren't we going to sell ourselves short and miss out on a huge market internationally?
Ultimately I think that a rule system that allows for the little team is a possible answer. I mean a team that brings their car in on a trailer...the Mom and Pop Racing Team, that hopes to beat the Big Time Racing Team and become famous, is the final solution. It will bring in competitors from all over the country, make great stories, and great racing.
-indyian
I would argue the flip side – that the “bandwagon” and many casual fans have moved on. They generally do.
ReplyDeleteIts the ICS' job to convert them. Other sports have lightning rods that were the cornerstones for growth; NASCAR, tennis, boxing, MMA, golf; You can name their biggest stars. The guys that emerged and were pushed into the limelight and became successful for many years. Saying that Danica's failure to succeed (i.e. win) has nothing to do with the inability of ICS to continue growing the numbers that suddenly appeared in 2005 is nothing short of a refusal to accept reality. Does anyone here think that if Tiger Woods emerged from the amateurs into the professional circuit in golf and wasn't massively succesful (perhaps only winning one ot two tournaments in his first 5 years) that golf would be in just as healthy a shape as it is today? Let's not be foolish.
As far as aggrandizement is concerned, I think I end up repeating points I've already touched on. You cannot throw random people out there and expect people to react, no matter how American or how similar they are to themselves. People don't want people that are like them. They want to follow people that are better than them. They don't want to believe that they can win the Indy 500. That doesn't get casual fans to watch. Casual fans want to see something that is truly remarkable in its difficulty to win. Being the fastest man on earth is not something Joe Blow running track at the local high school can do if he happens to be given the right shoes and an aerodynamic running suit from Nike. Before you go "But guys used to pull cars behind their pickups in the 1970s!" understand that this is not the 1970s. People know that elite world class, experimental race cars aren't dragged behind 5 year old Dodge Rams in 2009. You're not going to convince them otherwise now.
"Its the ICS' job to convert them."
ReplyDeleteWhat a concept.
_______________________________________
Andy Bernstein
Again, we are drifting off course. Let's define the elements of a job - in this case aggrandizement - and leave the discussion of how to address those elements to a later stage discussion. Until we have the elements defined with a consensus, discussions will yield a low return on time investment.
ReplyDeleteFortunately, technologies has when once more come to our aid.
ReplyDeleteSo, go for it and make a little your child will assume of twenty years from now.
Anybody who is household pompous feels affection for to beautify household.
Feel free to visit my web site; small room decorating tips
Wall paint: Paint colour choices also affect the look and feel of the room in a major way.
ReplyDeleteMake the best of your living room space. Here are a
few of the best office interior design options that businesses can consider.
my weblog - country home interior ideas
You will discover entire sites about this topic, so there is a lot to view.
ReplyDeleteYou won’t receive confirmation regarding the
table availability instantly. You can also come up with new
designs if you are creative enough to think of a new concept based on
their traditional designs.
Also visit my web blog - Edible Cake Decoration
If you decorate about your preferences and convictions, you may uncover that the process is
ReplyDeletea pleasure instead than a chore. It's a commemoration from the supposed birth of Jesus Christ on 25th December. Everyone feel they may be special, so a customised christmas present for the Particular person will often be recollected.
My page christmas decorating ideas
Think about how you will use this room: Will you be the only one there, or do you plan on entertaining guests frequently.
ReplyDeleteBefore beginning your interior design project, consider your budget.
Experience and practice in this sphere play a great
role in the future activity of any interior
designer.
Feel free to visit my homepage: interior decorating