March fastrac

[Stan]

You think the time slots that they air has anything to do w/ that? [/b]

One word: Tivo.

Yeah, the broadcast times are inconvenient, but SCCA is not the only victim of that. For some reason I can't get my pal Bernie to broadcast more than a few of his piddlin' little 18-car races at a time convenient for me to watch live, so I eventually gave in and invested in some modern recording technology. Cheap, convenient and super reliable.

 

[lateapex911]

Stan, I too Tivo everything. But whats being said here is that, (I think I can boil it down to these points?)

• The club broadcasts it's races on Speed, and one major hope in that is to gain membership and racers. Arguably, thats integral with the whole ProRacing concept.
• The broadcasts are on at inconvenient times.
• Newbies don't know enough to go searching for our races to Tivo, so the broadcast times are sort of defeating the purpose.
• On top of that, here we are finally getting some exposure, but we're showing the product that most newbies aren't attracted to! DUH! Prod races are looked at as Vintage, Sports racers are seen by most newbies as too "radical" to try first, (same for most open wheel classes) and Touring looks cool...but $$$$....at least to entry level folks. The single best "entry level" category (debate the SM thing seprately, LOL) is IT, and it's never mentioned or shown.
• Its a shame to waste the clubs single best marketing and exposure opportunity by not showing the right product, and soing it at a bad time.

The simple solution is to make all Nationally recognized classes Runoffs eligible, Hold out say 3 classes for "promoters option" so the club can make sure that classes that need to be there for business reasons can be (I'm not an idiot, I know there are other forces at play here), and then let the chips fall where they may.

What we'd end up with is classes and categories thinking BIG picture. CSR/DSR? They'd start figuring out a solution, as would the Prod folk. They'd have to, as it's obvious that their numbers have been a huge joke for years, and nobody's been strong enough to come right out and say the King has no clothes.

The club needs to stop dorking around and just do it. Let the market decide. It will in the end anyway, but by either leaving the club, or not joining in the frst place, which is NOT the desired outcome

 

[Bill Miller]

One word: Tivo.

Yeah, the broadcast times are inconvenient, but SCCA is not the only victim of that. For some reason I can't get my pal Bernie to broadcast more than a few of his piddlin' little 18-car races at a time convenient for me to watch live, so I eventually gave in and invested in some modern recording technology. Cheap, convenient and super reliable.
[/b]

Stan,

Pretty arrogant, don't you think? As Jake pointed out, you don't want to make them have to search around for when the races are on, so they can program their Tivo. Be nice if you could get it slotted next to one of the shows that gets a lot of younger viewer's attention, like Pinks, Nopi Tuner Vision, etc. You want them to happen to catch after their watching one of the shows that they like. Or at least run ads for when the races will be on. Take a que from network TV, they run shows that are hurting right after shows that are very popular. Granted, it works less now, w/ remotes, than it did when people had to actually get up and go change the channel, but it's still a valid model. And do you think that F1 may have just a bit more exposure than the SCCA Runoffs? I'd actually expect more from a CRB member.

 

[Stan]

The simple solution is to make all Nationally recognized classes Runoffs eligible, Hold out say 3 classes for "promoters option" so the club can make sure that classes that need to be there for business reasons can be (I'm not an idiot, I know there are other forces at play here), and then let the chips fall where they may.[/b]

I never took you for an idiot, Jake!

Seriously, I agree 100% that the Club should have only "classes". One suggestion that's been floating around for years for dealing with the number of classes at the Runoffs (most recently repeated by Prod guy and former CRB member Basil Adams) would be to allow all GCR classes to attend the Runoffs who get more than, say, 15 competitors to sign up for the Runoffs. Cut qualifying to 3 sessions. Hold the lowest subscribed classes' races on non-televised Thursday. Scratch tire warming and hold the top 24 classes' races, 8 per day, from Friday through Sunday. The details would need to be worked out, but's worth discussing.

What we'd end up with is classes and categories thinking BIG picture. CSR/DSR? They'd start figuring out a solution, as would the Prod folk. They'd have to, as it's obvious that their numbers have been a huge joke for years, and nobody's been strong enough to come right out and say the King has no clothes.[/b]

Speaking as a CSR guy, I agree with a resounding YES! For years (decades?) some classes have been in a state of complacency as they met the minimum number to retain their National status and hang onto a spot in the Runoffs, all the while losing cars and drivers. In fact, I recently read on the Prod forum that last year only 36 HP guys ran enough races to qualify for the Runoffs. I'll bet San Francisco Region alone has more ITS and A cars that ran 4 races than HP did in the entire nation. CSR isn't much better off, where about 85 drivers ran Nationals.

The club needs to stop dorking around and just do it. Let the market decide. It will in the end anyway, but by either leaving the club, or not joining in the frst place, which is NOT the desired outcome.[/b]

Peter and I are working on it, but we have to build a consensus first.

 

[lateapex911]

Thanks Stan, it's good to hear from those up the line. I'm sure a lot of the guys who post here aren't aware of what some of our CRB guys are thinking.

In my experience, toadys CRB is, shall we say, more "proactive" than most might imagine. That's not to say they'll just whip the ship around overnight, and there's no guarantee that any of us will truly like the new direction, but, it's obvious that there are those on the board for whom "Business as usual" isn't good enough.

 

[Stan]

Stan,

Pretty arrogant, don't you think? As Jake pointed out, you don't want to make them have to search around for when the races are on, so they can program their Tivo. Be nice if you could get it slotted next to one of the shows that gets a lot of younger viewer's attention, like Pinks, Nopi Tuner Vision, etc. You want them to happen to catch after their watching one of the shows that they like. Or at least run ads for when the races will be on. Take a que from network TV, they run shows that are hurting right after shows that are very popular. Granted, it works less now, w/ remotes, than it did when people had to actually get up and go change the channel, but it's still a valid model. And do you think that F1 may have just a bit more exposure than the SCCA Runoffs? I'd actually expect more from a CRB member.[/b]

Bill, did you resign your sense of humor along with your membership? I made light of your comment about the slot times for Runoffs broadcasts because we have no control over when the races are broadcast. As the BoD has said repeatedly, we don't pay for the coverage and Speed pays all their own costs to produce the vids. In return we have no say in when it is shown.

 

[Bill Miller]

Bill, did you resign your sense of humor along with your membership? I made light of your comment about the slot times for Runoffs broadcasts because we have no control over when the races are broadcast. As the BoD has said repeatedly, we don't pay for the coverage and Speed pays all their own costs to produce the vids. In return we have no say in when it is shown.
[/b]

Then what the hell is the point of having them broadcast at all? It's supposed to be a marketing tool for us, yet we're not going to use it to that end. Don't kid yourself into thinking that SPEED is not making money on airing the Runoffs. It's our 'product', we should have some say over how they use it. And we absolutely have control over when the races are shown, it's part of the contract negotiation that allows SPEED to broadcast them. You may know a lot about race cars, but it sure seems like you don't know much about business.

 

[gran racing]

Don't kid yourself into thinking that SPEED is not making money on airing the Runoffs. [/b]

I'm don't think 3 a.m. advertising slots are going for much these days. In my opinion, SPEED is using the Runoffs coverage to fill some space, while providing a product dedicated viewers will watch.

we don't pay for the coverage and Speed pays all their own costs to produce the vids.[/b]

I didn't realize that. That's pretty cool. Free advertising regardless of the time it is aired should always be welcomed.

 

[erlrich]

Then what the hell is the point of having them broadcast at all? It's supposed to be a marketing tool for us, yet we're not going to use it to that end. Don't kid yourself into thinking that SPEED is not making money on airing the Runoffs. It's our 'product', we should have some say over how they use it. And we absolutely have control over when the races are shown, it's part of the contract negotiation that allows SPEED to broadcast them. You may know a lot about race cars, but it sure seems like you don't know much about business. [/b]

Bill, you should really consider adding a tag line as Joe did, unless of course the point is to make it perfectly clear that you are indeed a pompous ass. If that's the case then just continue as you are, as you're doing a great job.

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Bill, you should really consider adding a tag line as Joe did, unless of course the point is to make it perfectly clear that you are indeed a pompous ass. If that's the case then just continue as you are, as you're doing a great job.

[/b]

Bill's a good guy, he just spends too much time on the Prod board...

We debate nitpicky rules, they slam the SCCA at every turn. Po-TA-toe, Po-TAH-toe

 

[StephenB]

Bill, you should really consider adding a tag line as Joe did, unless of course the point is to make it perfectly clear that you are indeed a pompous ass. If that's the case then just continue as you are, as you're doing a great job.
[/b]

I agree.

 

[tnord]

Then what the hell is the point of having them broadcast at all? It's supposed to be a marketing tool for us, yet we're not going to use it to that end. Don't kid yourself into thinking that SPEED is not making money on airing the Runoffs. It's our 'product', we should have some say over how they use it. And we absolutely have control over when the races are shown, it's part of the contract negotiation that allows SPEED to broadcast them. You may know a lot about race cars, but it sure seems like you don't know much about business.
[/b]

....except for i believe it costs something on the order of $1.5mil to get Speed out there, set up, footage recorded, and torn down. if SCCA had to flip that bill, i bet we wouldn't have any coverage.

something about a gift horse and mouths come to mind.

 

[p.keane]

Andy, I do not agree with your letter at all. Why should paying entrants not be counted, just because they are IT cars? All of the current 1990 and newer IT car are Prepared eligible. All the CRB did was allowed current IT cars to run in Prepared with out purchasing a SIR and retuning their engines. If the IT competitor likes the Nation/Prepared experience they can upgrade their current car to the Prepared rule set. As part of the same rules changes, the CRB made it easier for current World Challenge cars to compete in the Prepared class. The WC cars will bolster the Prepared numbers, but were are the complaints on the Prod site about letting them run unmodified? The Prod guys just do not want to let the red headed step child in IT to compete in National events. Where is your letter asking for the Pro guys not to be counted?

It is very simple; the Prod guy had the first crack at bring the IT guys to National events, but did not want to do it fairly. Now that there is an alternative, the CRB is out to get them. You know that that is not true. I was just at a regional this weekend (Sebring short course) and there were 22 ITB cars and 15 ITC cars. Can you name a national event that had that many G & HP car in it last year? I think it sucks that there are hundreds of IT competitors that support this club and do not have a say what happens nationally, or get invited to the dance. I know the Prod guys like to say the IT is regional only, but that came from the beginning of IT when everyone thought that they were rolling junk yards. That is not the norm for IT cars today and I believe that there are example of IT car that are better prepared then some of the cars running at the front at National events. PK

 

[greendot]

So, about the 1990 requirement. The second gen RX-7 spec line is 86-91. Any car in that range could be identical to the next one except for the VIN. Is the rule meant to include cars that have 90 or newer in the same speck line or is it hard and fast 1990? Just not well thought out IMO.
[/b]

OK, so we have hopefully gotten away from the chat about TV coverage. Does anybody have any input regarding my question? Or must I say it in a way that offends somebody to get a reply?

 

[Greg Amy]

Greendot, I don't think anyone here is going to have an answer for you. Strictly to the rules, especially given the VIN requirement in IT, I don't see how an equivalent 1989 Mazda RX-7 is legal to compete in Prepared, regardless of its equivalence to the legal 1990. Will that be enforced?

This is a good one to send to the CRB. They're the ones that came up with this rule, it's really their call as to how to handle it.

 

[erlrich]

OK, so we have hopefully gotten away from the chat about TV coverage. Does anybody have any input regarding my question? Or must I say it in a way that offends somebody to get a reply? [/b]

Yes, exactly - your post was nowhere near inflamatory enough to get a response, you should really work on that.

Seriously though, I think Greg is right on. I would add, and am just guessing, that the 1990-up requirement was probably just an arbitrary line in the sand, intended to keep the "antiques" out of the class, and not done with consideration for any particular model line. I would bet the CRB would be receptive to allowances for models that cross over. Or not

 

[JIgou]

Andy, I do not agree with your letter at all. Why should paying entrants not be counted, just because they are IT cars? All of the current 1990 and newer IT car are Prepared eligible. All the CRB did was allowed current IT cars to run in Prepared with out purchasing a SIR and retuning their engines. If the IT competitor likes the Nation/Prepared experience they can upgrade their current car to the Prepared rule set. As part of the same rules changes, the CRB made it easier for current World Challenge cars to compete in the Prepared class. The WC cars will bolster the Prepared numbers, but were are the complaints on the Prod site about letting them run unmodified? The Prod guys just do not want to let the red headed step child in IT to compete in National events. Where is your letter asking for the Pro guys not to be counted?[/b]

My response to that would be something along the lines of "Because the Prepared classes - along with F1000 - were answers to questions no one asked." My understanding is that the Prepared classes were created specifically FOR the current and past WC car (although it appears that got screwed up somehow....)

As for the "Pro" guys taking part and their numbers counting? Fine. The class was created for them, so their old thrashed cars can perhaps hold some semblance of market value after a season of PRO racing. Let them support it.

But offering it up to IT as a way to "try out" National racing? Please. Even though the season is young, it's been going long enough to see the trend in BP and DP participation. Unless SOMETHING happens to fill the fields, the new dream classes will die on the vine. The move to "allow" IT a chance to "try out" National racing is a thinly veiled attempt to manufacture participation numbers and keep the class alive.

My question to you would be:

The GCR has a clearly-defined process for a class to become National. Suddenly this year we've got how many new classes that haven't followed that process? Why?

And now there's an allowance for cars that WILL be field fillers in the new golden child class.....why? Sorry, but I just don't buy the "Here's a chance to try out National racing" bit.

Maybe it's a cynical outlook, but the past couple of years of FSCCA not hitting those GCR numbers coupled with the 24-25-24 "We'd kill off GTL if it were number 25, but since it was T3 we'll extend the lease" Runoffs dance has helped jade more than a few folks who DO care about the club and the classes.

Jarrod

 

[tnord]

All the CRB did was allowed current IT cars to run in Prepared with out purchasing a SIR and retuning their engines. If the IT competitor likes the Nation/Prepared experience they can upgrade their current car to the Prepared rule set. [/b]

whether this actually WAS the CRB/BODs intent for this allowance or not (i really don't buy it one bit), the reality of the situation (remember intent vs reality in the ECU rule) is that this is all f*#@&d up, and IT cars are serving as a life raft to try and keep the Prepared class alive at the expense of established and healthy classes. AT BEST this is a zero-sum game.

outside of the changes made in IT, the classing structure and runoffs requirements is a joke. you print a rule about minimum entrants/event, max classes for the runoffs, then not 12mos later those lines are striked and replaced with whatever rule needs to be written to mess things up further and "keep everyone happy."

the CRB/BOD needs to grow some balls and do what everyone with a brain knows needs to be done. eliminate dead weight.

<--submitting a letter similar to Andy's today.

 

[planet6racing]

So, you guys are writing letters to stop me from my ultimate plan?

1) Run in prepared with my little ITA car.
2) Qualify for the Runoffs
3) Drive to Topeka with big signs on the trailer saying things to the effect of "IT rules, Production Drools!"
4) Get air time on SPEED pushing my super secret agenda
5) ???
6) PROFIT!!

Since the CENDIV probably won't have too many cars for the DP group, I think being in the top 10 in points shouldn't be that hard. It'll be a great time to be the lone IT car there...

 

[p.keane]

"My question to you would be:

The GCR has a clearly-defined process for a class to become National. Suddenly this year we've got how many new classes that haven't followed that process? Why?

And now there's an allowance for cars that WILL be field fillers in the new golden child class.....why? Sorry, but I just don't buy the "Here's a chance to try out National racing" bit.

Maybe it's a cynical outlook, but the past couple of years of FSCCA not hitting those GCR numbers coupled with the 24-25-24 "We'd kill off GTL if it were number 25, but since it was T3 we'll extend the lease" Runoffs dance has helped jade more than a few folks who DO care about the club and the classes."


JIgou;
The difference is in the past all National classes got invited to the Runoffs. Now it is only the top 24. New classes can compete in National events, but do not get a spot at the Runoffs. The BOD changed the number of classes to 25. The BOD members I have talked to said they would have done the same thing for GTL.

Tnord
IT cars have been supporting Nationals for years, why do you think we have a two hundred car IT feild at the National at Daytona? I agree with you about the balls part, but because we are a club it does not seem to happen.