TulsaWarrior
06-20-2013, 07:53 AM
Having spent 30 years at the mercy of TV rates with my job at stake I feel I know a couple of things about the monster.
Paint Touches came out with a piece questioning the value of the New Big East because of the apparent low ratings potential. I respect the guys at PT and the outstanding work they have done since arriving on the scene. I want to remind them it's not where your ratings start it's where they lead. Building ratings can take years but you have to have building blocks. The Big East is a name brand with value to build on. Whether that takes place is up to the league members and Fox. I do not doubt Fox will do their part. Buzz's story line is a marketing dream. So is the Butler "Cinderella" story and there are other potential national story lines.
A little bit about my background. I started as a broadcaster and saw it change to narrowcasting. Audiences are targeted to reach specific demographics. Our regular accessing to specific sites on the Internet provide a wealth of information for data mining marketing. The Fox contract provides programming for a start up and drives traffic to online sites. That is an acorn that will give Fox invaluable marketing information that goes far beyond college basketball ratings.
Even without the data mining information think about other start up media operations. Does anyone remember the first year of CNN? We called them the "Chicken Noodle Network." Ted Turner's entry into cable was a down and out UHF independent TV station in Atlanta that aired 1950s reruns of "The Cisco Kid" and treated news like a joke. Fox New was practically given away to cable companies just so they could get on the air and build an audience. ESPN's first years amounted to picking up programming none of the big networks or cable operations wanted. (Their production values were crappy at best.)
We're in a new ratings and media world. The target keeps moving and that means paradigms of the past don't mean much. Those who understand that have become billionaires.
Paint Touches came out with a piece questioning the value of the New Big East because of the apparent low ratings potential. I respect the guys at PT and the outstanding work they have done since arriving on the scene. I want to remind them it's not where your ratings start it's where they lead. Building ratings can take years but you have to have building blocks. The Big East is a name brand with value to build on. Whether that takes place is up to the league members and Fox. I do not doubt Fox will do their part. Buzz's story line is a marketing dream. So is the Butler "Cinderella" story and there are other potential national story lines.
A little bit about my background. I started as a broadcaster and saw it change to narrowcasting. Audiences are targeted to reach specific demographics. Our regular accessing to specific sites on the Internet provide a wealth of information for data mining marketing. The Fox contract provides programming for a start up and drives traffic to online sites. That is an acorn that will give Fox invaluable marketing information that goes far beyond college basketball ratings.
Even without the data mining information think about other start up media operations. Does anyone remember the first year of CNN? We called them the "Chicken Noodle Network." Ted Turner's entry into cable was a down and out UHF independent TV station in Atlanta that aired 1950s reruns of "The Cisco Kid" and treated news like a joke. Fox New was practically given away to cable companies just so they could get on the air and build an audience. ESPN's first years amounted to picking up programming none of the big networks or cable operations wanted. (Their production values were crappy at best.)
We're in a new ratings and media world. The target keeps moving and that means paradigms of the past don't mean much. Those who understand that have become billionaires.