Speedvision->Speed Channel

  • Thread starter MazKid
  • 58 comments
  • 1,499 views
I wrote speed channel a polite but stern letter about their new programing and how it was not good because of there is no more changes in content, If you notice too that there is usually a logo under Speed Channel that says NASCAR TV. I told them that if NASCAR is what they want to have played all the time to be honest with there viewers and drop the speed channel name. I am hoping more people will join me in this and get our speed vision back. i don't even watch the channel anymore unless i know something is going to be on like WRC. Before i used to turn it on and watch what ever was on cause it was usually all good, like the old classic races with triumphs and such. I even watched the ocasional ship shape, i don't even like boats but it was interesting. go to this link to go and complain to speed channel.

http://www.speedvision.com/feedback/?lvl=0f&cat=22&a_id=3

don't think i'm a NASCAR hater, i don't like it but it is a motorsport so i have some level of respect for left turns now.
 
yeah i sent mine about a week or so ago but they haven't replied to me at all. There ratings have to have gone down, i havn't heard anyone say "have you seen the new speed channel.....It is so much better" I doubt i will either.
 
Do they even still have the european announcers? or did they fire them as soon as Speed Channel resumes... If F1 is announced by a nascar guy I am going to flip!
 
Ralph She-hee-hee-hee: "Look at their necks lean when they corner! That's because of g force. Gee, that's some force. Get it? Ha ha, I slay me. Montoya rode part of the rumble strip, did you see, did you see?! I have to sit down, I'm winded."
 
It just keeps getting worse. The poor WRC commentator only gets more and more irritating the more you listen to him. Who in their right mind would have chosen him for a job that involved any use of his voice at all? :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Talentless
Ralph She-hee-hee-hee: "Look at their necks lean when they corner! That's because of g force. Gee, that's some force. Get it? Ha ha, I slay me. Montoya rode part of the rumble strip, did you see, did you see?! I have to sit down, I'm winded."
Click to expand...
Haha! "This is SOOOO much better than NASCAR!!!" might just slip out, too... :D
 
Bob "I can use a comb" Varsha: "Welcome to Speed News your round up of the week's motorsport news. We have plenty of exciting information for you in the exciting Speed News format!

Dave "noone gives a damn about my commentary" Despain: "Even though I am bored out of my mind and would rather be motocrossing, I will tell you fools about the exciting Speed News format. First we have 15 minutes of NASCAR, then NASCAR updates every 5 -7 minutes, with a few open wheel races thrown in, and, if you're lucky, more NASCAR."

Bob: "Don't forget about our Formula One coverage exclusively here on the Speed Channel!"

Dave: "That's Mr. Despain to you."

Bob: "Okay? Tune in for our sunday edition where will give you one minute of Formula One preseason news, and wait until next week when we will add another fifteen seconds to that coverage."
 
Good to see I'm not the only one turned off by the switch. Even the channel name sounds worse. "SPEEEEEEED" channel. I swear they intend to pick up viewing time from junkies.

I can watch a NASCAR race, but I certainly can't watch one for more than half an hour. And they have WRC coverage... slightly. The coma-inspiring Winston Cup preview coverage had me fuming, and now that they don't show ANY SCCA events makes me want to boycott the whole damn thing. I used to be able to turn on Svision, and either see ALMS GT2 coverage, Muscle Car documentaries or LoMS, SCCA sportsman class racing, or perhaps Motor show coverage. Now I turn on the TV and some illiterate redneck is on describing why turning left continuously is so damn difficult. I got a $60 premium cable package for SPEEDVISION only, not this POS.
 
Anyone read the new SCC? Josh Jacqout's editorial is right one the $$$$. More rolling billboards on SpeedChannel = more money for SpeedChannel. :mad:
 
They still carry the SCCA, just the Valvoline runnoffs are done for now, so they arn't showing anything yet... At least they only miss two formula one events. Guess I will have to watch them on abc
 
Uggggghhhhhh. This is so dumb.

I don't actually have speedvision because im too poor, but I've watched it sometimes and have always drooled over the idea of having 24hr/day of actual motorsports coverage. Actual road racing, lemans, rally, scca racing, etc. The once every 5 months that NBC has the amls on, i watch it, and just crave more.

I hate NASCAR, and i hate alot of this capitalist bull**** of money ruling everything. Everything is about making money. Its all about monopolies. Its all about microsoft and that ****. Its why all movies are crap these days, theyre all hyped hollywood overexpensive superflicks that are garbage.

I hate nascar cause its boring and because its so popular and peaple are so dumb and dont understand why its so boring. People say its cool cause its fast, but speed isnt ****. If theres no acceleration its not the same. people dont realise that its acceleration and G's that makes you **** your pants, and is fun. WOOOHOOOOOO no turning i love it.

All of you that have speedvision. When they changed over do you still have to pay for it? Didnt they notify you? I couldnt imagine having payed good money to watch something good, and have it all of a sudden turn into garbage. There must be some legal crap about this.

Anyway, i think capitalism is a good thing generally. Competition is what makes quality. But when 95% of this country is made up of idiots and rednecks it pisses me off to see the outcome. Everything will be made to please these bastards instead of ppl like us. its the reason for NASCAR, fast and the furious, this channel buyout and more.

This is why i stopped buying SCC. The editors are smart mature non teenage folk, and the articles were usually pretty good, but then all the car features are god damn ricey peaces of ****. Stupid teenage kids with pink civics with lights and massive wings. Now the whole mag is like that. Mcmullen Argus has all of those mags (turbo, scc, import tuner, etc.), and now theyre all alike, its that gr8ride.com ****.

So the only places to turn for good reading and watching would be grassroots motorsports magazine, and speedvision, which for both you have to pay a premium price because the mass majority of ppl dont buy those, theyre for a very small niche market.

Then assholes buy speedvision out!!!!

If the gran turismo series ever turns bad, only to please the mass majority of people, we can blame this.
 
Originally posted by CrackHoor
Anyone read the new SCC? Josh Jacqout's editorial is right one the $$$$. More rolling billboards on SpeedChannel = more money for SpeedChannel. :mad:
Click to expand...
Sport Compact Car? They don't like it either? Yay!!! I'm going to have to pick that issue up... :)
 
Originally posted by advanR
Uggggghhhhhh. This is so dumb.

I don't actually have speedvision because im too poor, but I've watched it sometimes and have always drooled over the idea of having 24hr/day of actual motorsports coverage. Actual road racing, lemans, rally, scca racing, etc. The once every 5 months that NBC has the amls on, i watch it, and just crave more.

I hate NASCAR, and i hate alot of this capitalist bull**** of money ruling everything. Everything is about making money. Its all about monopolies. Its all about microsoft and that ****. Its why all movies are crap these days, theyre all hyped hollywood overexpensive superflicks that are garbage.

I hate nascar cause its boring and because its so popular and peaple are so dumb and dont understand why its so boring. People say its cool cause its fast, but speed isnt ****. If theres no acceleration its not the same. people dont realise that its acceleration and G's that makes you **** your pants, and is fun. WOOOHOOOOOO no turning i love it.

All of you that have speedvision. When they changed over do you still have to pay for it? Didnt they notify you? I couldnt imagine having payed good money to watch something good, and have it all of a sudden turn into garbage. There must be some legal crap about this.

Anyway, i think capitalism is a good thing generally. Competition is what makes quality. But when 95% of this country is made up of idiots and rednecks it pisses me off to see the outcome. Everything will be made to please these bastards instead of ppl like us. its the reason for NASCAR, fast and the furious, this channel buyout and more.

This is why i stopped buying SCC. The editors are smart mature non teenage folk, and the articles were usually pretty good, but then all the car features are god damn ricey peaces of ****. Stupid teenage kids with pink civics with lights and massive wings. Now the whole mag is like that. Mcmullen Argus has all of those mags (turbo, scc, import tuner, etc.), and now theyre all alike, its that gr8ride.com ****.

So the only places to turn for good reading and watching would be grassroots motorsports magazine, and speedvision, which for both you have to pay a premium price because the mass majority of ppl dont buy those, theyre for a very small niche market.

Then assholes buy speedvision out!!!!

If the gran turismo series ever turns bad, only to please the mass majority of people, we can blame this.
Click to expand...
Great post, advanR! Welcome to GTPlanet. :)
 
I read the post more carefully and I am sorry, but you come off as an elitist snob.

I do not disagree with all that you have said, but let us not bash people for their taste. And NASCAR drivers do road race on occasion.

I know what you said but I am going to state anyway that I would take capitalism over socialism any day.

I subscribe to GRM and HPP (one of the gr8ride.com mags.)

I cannot hate people for their preferrence, all I know is that the US seems to lack the patience and understanding to follow many of the series that use mostly road courses. Road racing is like ballet (sp?), to enjoy it you must appreciate the beauty of motion, whereas oval racing has the speed to make up for what it lacks in grace.
 
Originally posted by Talentless
I read the post more carefully and I am sorry, but you come off as an elitist snob.

I do not diagree with all that you have said, but let us not bash people for their taste. And NASCAR drivers do road race on occasion.

I know what you said but I am going to state anyway that I would take capitalism over socialism any day.

I subscribe to GRM and HPP (one of the gr8ride.com mags.)

I cannot hate people for their preferrence, all I know is that the US seems to lack the patience and understanding to follow many of the series that use mostly road courses. Road racing is like ballet (sp?), to enjoy it you must appreciate the beauty of motion, whereas oval racing has the speed to make up for what it lacks in grace.
Click to expand...
Good point, and analogy, Talentless. :)
 
I should also say that we have kept the attacks on NASCAR low here, if any.

Seems some NASCAR fans are the brunt of insults and rude jokes, and though I am not happy about what NASCAR has done to Speedvision, I do not hate NASCAR'S fans.
 
No, I don't hate NASCAR, either. I just don't want to watch it...
 
Well..... Prefrence is one thing, but changing it to more nascar? There are many channels that play it, we don't need another.

Socailism vs communism! Common people lets get this right! Communism --> In practice all over the world. ex russia, cuba ect.
Socialism --> An ideal, everyone and everything are equal, everyone gets the same thing, everyone is equal. No wars, no fights, everyone has equal opportunity.

I know that if I was in the states posting this right now, I would be killed, but if REAL socialism (ala Karl Marx) was put into effect, the world would probably be a better place.

Anyway, you were implying communism, but just to correct ya ;)
 
Death, I really do not know much about pure socialism, but when you have guys responding to the legitimate claim that part of it is about taking money from one group in order to sustain another, or at least up their level of living, when they do not know how the money will be used, and the response is, "does it ruin you?", it is a little hard to be very supportive. I would not mind socialists so much if they would not go on this fairness kick, I do not consider ideas which seem to stem in part from classicism fair.

Also, socialists are far left, a group I generally disagree with.
 
Forced equality is not and never has been equality. Some would advocate we ban all racial slurs. Sounds good, but how does one propose to deal with parents that teach it in home, will we invade houses?

Alexander Pires thinks departments within the US government should have part of their money taken away to start some kind of trust fund for blacks as a means of reparations. Now I am not arguing about reparations, but to say that because money exists somewhere it is usable, is ridiculous. I do believe he implied such a thing. Does he think the Department of Argriculture will roll over for him?

A final question I would like to ask is that if socialism is so great, trust in people, why all the regulations? Well, I'm not anti-regulation as much as I wonder if the regulation designs approved by a majority would be excepted if it turned out to be conservative.

If there is such a trust in your fellow man, such a believe in the idea that diplomacy, aid and so on are superior to military action, a basic trust in the change of policy toward which nations are funded and so on, then where do socialists stand on guns?
 
I knew I shouldn't have opened the bag!!! *slap*

Anywhoo, study some pure socailistic stuff, then lets have a discussion. Just to see if you see it as I do..

Generally the reason it turns into communism is becuase the leaders of the revolutions tend to start with the ideals of socialism, then get high on powever, ultimately becoming a dictator.....


Who says anything about taking away from another??? Everyone gets paid by the government, and works for that money. The fact that the money would be the same accross the board is actually more like what it should be. Think about it. Doctors make sooo much money because they heal us. Do they do more important work than common people paving roads? If everyone had the same access to education, wouldn't our world be a better place??

Everyone that has invented something that has been worth wile has had backing of some sort of means for education... In the past a family "adopted" some young inventor, artisane ect. Now government to a certain extent handles that. But each, both past and present requires connections or money, or both. Imagine how many people would have the ability to forward their ideas.

To a great extent, our world world be much cleaner. Think about that to. Capatalism does pollute more than a socialistic society. A new emmission equipment comes out. In a capatalistic society, they don't chang what they are doing, because it is not cost effective. If it were socialism, everything could be transfered. The electric engine in a socialism environment would have been developed and employed instantly. Here it is repressed by oil companys that basically controll our free "democracy"

However take the filp side. A pure "democracy" would be ideal as well. Both would work great. However, a pure democracy is impossible the same way that a pure socialisitc attitude is impossible. If you think about it, we are basically democratically wise, back where England and France were in the 1600's. Before Louis the 13th of france, the country was controlled by representitives of the different area's.

Now instead of having them be appointed, they are elected. Both are basically the same thing. You appoint. they do whatever they want. You elect same thing. Politicians promise things to get you to elect them, then they turn around then do whatever they like. Sure ever 2 or so years you get to re elect, but still, you just do the same thing over again. Our democracies are designed so that we feel like we actually contributed somthing to our country, where we are basically doing nothing spectacular.

Call me a synic or the devils advocate, either one.
 
Originally posted by Talentless
If there is such a trust in your fellow man, such a believe in the idea that diplomacy, aid and so on are superior to military action, a basic trust in the change of policy toward which nations are funded and so on, then where do socialists stand on guns?
Click to expand...

They don't communists do. Read up on sociallism. Just take a look at the communist manifesto. This is an ideal, not a government.

Whats to say that democracys don't stand on guns? The US goes and forces other countries to turn to democracys, not nessecerily though voilence. But through embargo's ect. That kills the country just as quickly as war. It generally kills more of the people that the states wants to "rescue" than an all out war would.

Of course, most views of people come from what they hear on tv witch is VERY tainted by the government wether it is free speech or not.
 
The question about the gun was meant to bring up the question of whether or not an idea which may coincide with the right wing of the US would still be advocated.

And I know that socialism and communism are not the samething, but statements about how a society would be if without some negatives socialism took over is a pretty idealistic statement itself. And socialism is basically people's power, put simply, right. What do you reason might happen if you have the government gaining power in the name of balance in accordance with the peoples' will?

As far as Iraq is concerned (I believe that issue was on your mind at the time of your reply to my gun inquiry) , I think there is supposedly evidence that he is wasting money himself. And even if that is not the case I would like to know more about what the socialist ideas are.

They seem incomplete or in disregard of safety as any action Bush takes, more or less.

The warning is that if we kill one terrorist another will pop up. True, but if the first is a proven threat, all others are speculative, in comparison, well, maybe that advocates restraint, but you still have the risks associated with the idea of giving aid and education and just letting be.

As far as intruding and imposing go, well, yeah it sounds wrong, but if you are expected to assist that country and you do, all actions by it are subject to scrutiny, as are you. Suppose Canada decides to give aid to Denmark, I doubt Canada would be free from criticism if Denmark bombs Spain, especially if Canada gave arms to Denmark, even if only .45 cal. autos. Should a nation really assist in a blind fashion?

Hatred can resist regardless of what education is given, kind of hard to stop what is passed down through the generation.

Another problem is that social advocates want to help everybody, so we end up with a change over to another power source, gotta help the laid of workers. Suffering in Africa, gotta give aid. Tell me what the plan is if a member nation says no and without them it is not enough.

I do not trust pure democracies because people are not as smart as an idealist wants to believe, that is why I am not flat out against regulations.

I should correct my far left statement, they are just in favor of more control by people and a trustable government, but the expectation does seem to be that their ideas , generally left wing, will dominate. To a great extent, but if the will is toward a different political slant, especially an about opposite one, well, that could anger a lot of people.

Actually, wouldn't every one get taxed by the government who then doles it out as someone sees fit? We work so we can earn the right to have taxes paid back in some percentage?

Sorry, but if a guy puts effort towards his job and is successfull and you up his tax for what beyond what could be considered reasonable, an aid program with restrictions, to just saying to some guy that he should get the same, a person who may or may not use it productively , you take from the first guys success, and do not know how either person would put back into the economy?

If it is tainted by the government should I go against all ideas a new socialist one has?
 
Originally posted by Jordan
I just saw the Rally of Sweden on the "Speed Channel", and I can't believe the commentator!! :mad: This yelling guy sounds like he's broadcasting a NASCAR race or football game, not the WRC! Have all the 2002 rallies featured this guy so far, or is this another gift of the "Speed Channel"? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I saw that, man it sucked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!This is the worst thing evr!!!!!!
 
Uhh.... im going to stay out of the political discussions going on.

But as for Speedvision, I highly recommend those who agree that the changover is wrong to help do something about it. I was searching the internet and have found many sites with similar hatred towards this move.

http://www.petitiononline.com/svsn/

Here is a petition that i found. Please sign it, and any others that you might find. And depending on how worse it gets, consider cancelling your service with them. Fox most likely wont care about a petition, but they will definately care about possibly losing money.
These methods might show them that the already happy speedvision customers outweight the number of NASCAR fans that they expect to sign up with the service.
And who knows, maybe the fact that *most* NASCAR fans are poor southern whitetrash would be a factor in this, as they couldnt possibly afford the monthly bill.
:cowboy:

Damn, when i was looking at the smily icons, look at all the cool ones i found
:turban: :sombrero:
:tophat: inspector hahah :Pirate: :chinahat: :amish:

wow these smilies are very ethnic

who the weirdest thing happened, as i was submitting my signature, the page wont load anymore, it looks to be down. well, hopefully it will be back later
 

Latest Posts

Back