What is up with Mazda vs SCCA???
- Thread starter lateapex911
- Start date
Ron Earp
Administrator
Complete Mazda Survey
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
Thanks for participating. These answers are very important to our motorsports program. MAZDASPEED appreciates you and your time. This should only take about 5 minutes.
1 *What is your Team Support Number (preferred) or Name?
2 *My primary racing organization in 2007 was:
SCCA
NASA
Grand-Am
IMSA
NHRA
Other, please specify
3 *Consider how happy you are with the primary club with which you currently compete. Please indicate how likely you would be to consider switching to another sanctioning body if you could campaign your Mazda elsewhere.
I am not satisfied with the organization I race with and would consider a change to another organization if I had the option
I am relatively satisfied with the current organization I race with but am interested in exploring other organizations
I am very satisfied with the current organization I race with and would not consider changing
Not sure
4 I have also participated in events sanctioned by the following organizations. (Multiple selection ok)
SCCA
NASA
Grand-Am
IMSA
NHRA
Other, please specify
5 *Which organization will be your primary focus in 2008?
SCCA
NASA
Grand-Am
IMSA
NHRA
Other, please specify
6 *I am currently actively participating in the following type(s) of racing. (Select all that apply)
Solo/Autocross
Club (Amateur) Road Racing
Import Drag Racing
Rally
Professional Racing
Other, please specify
7 If you are a Professional Racer, where do you race? (multiple ok)
MX-5 Cup
World Challenge
NASA
Star Mazda
Grand Am
Not Applicable
Other, please specify
8 *Please note the number of races you've competed in, over the past TWO years.
0 Races
1-3 Races
4-6 Races
7-9 Races
10-13 Races
14+ Races
Other, please specify
9 *Are you aware of any NASA racing events that are held at race tracks in your area? (race tracks where you normally compete)
Yes
No
Not Sure
Other, please specify
10 *Have you participated in any NASA Events?
Yes
No
11 Comments about anything on this page? (optional)
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
If you have not participated in a NASA racing event, please read the comment in the question below and check the one that most appropriately finishes the sentence for you:
12 *There are NASA racing events in my area…
- but I have not participated in them.
- but I do not care to participate in them.
- and I will be participating in their events in 2008.
I am not aware of a local NASA region or chapter that exists in my area.
Other, please specify
13 If you're not aware of any NASA region or chapter in your area, please give the name of the largest city where you reside.
14 *Are you active an active SCCA Club Racer? (National or Regional)
Yes
No
15 Comments about anything on this page? (optional)
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
These Questions are Specifically for SCCA Racers.
16 *Are you a Regional or National Competitor?
Regional
National
Both Regional and National
17 *Participating in SCCA events, how would you rate your personal experience competing at an SCCA race?
1 Excellent
2 Good
3 Fair
4 Needs Improvement
5 Very Dissatisfied N/A
Event Organization
Competency of Officials
Amount of Track Time
Level of Competition
Ability of organization to competently classify/equalize cars in your class
18 *Please note the type of racing you do.
Formula Cars
Sports Racer
GT Class
Production Class
Showroom Stock/Touring
Spec Miata
Improved Touring (IT)
Other, please specify
19 *Please note the specific classes you race in.
FORMULA MAZDA
FORMULA E
FORMULA ATLANTIC
C SPORTS
D SPORTS
GT1
GT2
GT3
GTL
E-PRODUCTION
F-PRODUCTION
SSB
SSC
T3
Spec Miata
ITS
ITA
IT7
Other, please specify
20 Comments about anything on this page? (optional)
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
As some of you may know, MAZDASPEED Motorsports and the leadership/management of the Sports Car Club of America (the Club) have had some difficult situations recently. Earlier this year, SCCA approved a suspension option package (MS-R) for the Mazda MX-5 for SSB class competition in 2007. Within two months, after some of our Mazda racers had purchased a 2007 MX-5, the option package, and raced with the option package, SCCA wrongly decided the package would not be legal for competition in 2007.
-
In October of this year at the SCCA Runoffs, one of our MAZDASPEED staff, there to support the Mazda competitiors at the event, was told by a prominent member of SCCA’s Board of Directors that “SCCA doesn’t need Mazda and Mazda doesn’t need SCCA". As you can imagine we were shocked that the club leadership felt this way about MAZDASPEED involvement.
-
Normally in the course of business relationships, when someone discounts your contribution to the point of saying we don’t need you, you take your business elsewhere. While that was our first reaction, it doesn’t take into consideration you, our customers and team members. These difficulties have affected many of our Mazda Team Support members and we have been working through them with your best interest as our #1 priority.
-
The long term commitment MAZDASPEED has made to our members and the results of these support programs has benefited Mazda as well. Mazda’s market share for street vehicles among club members is 3 times our industry average. Mazda is the most raced brand within the club, in fact over 50% based on the latest results. We benefit greatly by having team members as advocates for our vehicles as family and friends ask you what car to purchase. For all this support, we thank you.
-
Please read the following five (5) statements carefully and decide which one fits your feelings the best, then respond by clicking the box next to that statement. Please respond to only one link and respond only once. We would also appreciate any comments and suggestions you have on the matter and have provided a comment section for you to give any feedback. If you would like to copy any leadership of the club on your response, please feel free to do so. We suggest that your forward your comments to the National office as well as your local SCCA Region Executive.
-
While these choices don’t go into specific detail, they will give us an indication of the direction you (our customer) would like us to take and where we should apply our support. Please understand any support not given to SCCA in the future will still be invested into amateur (grass roots) racing. Our vision is to expand our position in this area, not pull back.
-
Again, thank you for your support in making MAZDASPEED Motorsports Development a great success and Mazda a success in the market place. We value your business and loyalty.
21 * MAZDASPEED is considering building stronger ties with other racing organizations such as NASA and scaling back involvement with SCCA. Please let us know if you support this idea. Following, are five statements, Please read all five statements and then select the one you MOST agree with.
1. Please continue the same level of support to SCCA Club Racing, I am satisfied with the Club and its leadership and plan to continue participating in SCCA events.
2. Please continue the same level of support to SCCA Club Racing. As a Mazdaspeed Motorsports Development member, I will get personally involved with club management to seek a solution to the current situation. If necessary, I will seek club office to protect the relationship between SCCA and with Mazdaspeed Motorsports.
3. I do not approve of the way SCCA Club Racing’s management and officials have acted or their comments. Don’t reward this bad behavior, but also don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Examine alternative places to compete with Mazdaspeed (i.e. NASA or other grass roots organizations) and keep me advised. At this point I do not have any available options for racing with alternative racing organizations and am limited to the SCCA. If Mazdaspeed withdraws its support from SCCA Club Racing I will be negatively impacted as I have no other place to race. I will support Mazdaspeed Motorsports by getting personally involved with club management to seek a solution to the current situation.
4. I do not approve of the way SCCA Club Racing’s management and officials have acted or their comments. There are other racing organizations in my area and I will consider participating with them as an alternative or in addition to SCCA. I can compete with anyone (NASA, SCCA, Mazda Owners Club, etc.), but I would prefer to have as many options as possible.
5. Stop all involvement with SCCA Club Racing as soon as possible (2008 season). I have an alternative racing organization where I can compete that is better. I feel that Mazdaspeed’s involvement in that organization will be more appreciated. In my response I will tell you where the support should be directed.
22 Comments? (optional)
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
Thanks for participating. These answers are very important to our motorsports program. MAZDASPEED appreciates you and your time. This should only take about 5 minutes.
1 *What is your Team Support Number (preferred) or Name?
2 *My primary racing organization in 2007 was:
SCCA
NASA
Grand-Am
IMSA
NHRA
Other, please specify
3 *Consider how happy you are with the primary club with which you currently compete. Please indicate how likely you would be to consider switching to another sanctioning body if you could campaign your Mazda elsewhere.
I am not satisfied with the organization I race with and would consider a change to another organization if I had the option
I am relatively satisfied with the current organization I race with but am interested in exploring other organizations
I am very satisfied with the current organization I race with and would not consider changing
Not sure
4 I have also participated in events sanctioned by the following organizations. (Multiple selection ok)
SCCA
NASA
Grand-Am
IMSA
NHRA
Other, please specify
5 *Which organization will be your primary focus in 2008?
SCCA
NASA
Grand-Am
IMSA
NHRA
Other, please specify
6 *I am currently actively participating in the following type(s) of racing. (Select all that apply)
Solo/Autocross
Club (Amateur) Road Racing
Import Drag Racing
Rally
Professional Racing
Other, please specify
7 If you are a Professional Racer, where do you race? (multiple ok)
MX-5 Cup
World Challenge
NASA
Star Mazda
Grand Am
Not Applicable
Other, please specify
8 *Please note the number of races you've competed in, over the past TWO years.
0 Races
1-3 Races
4-6 Races
7-9 Races
10-13 Races
14+ Races
Other, please specify
9 *Are you aware of any NASA racing events that are held at race tracks in your area? (race tracks where you normally compete)
Yes
No
Not Sure
Other, please specify
10 *Have you participated in any NASA Events?
Yes
No
11 Comments about anything on this page? (optional)
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
If you have not participated in a NASA racing event, please read the comment in the question below and check the one that most appropriately finishes the sentence for you:
12 *There are NASA racing events in my area…
- but I have not participated in them.
- but I do not care to participate in them.
- and I will be participating in their events in 2008.
I am not aware of a local NASA region or chapter that exists in my area.
Other, please specify
13 If you're not aware of any NASA region or chapter in your area, please give the name of the largest city where you reside.
14 *Are you active an active SCCA Club Racer? (National or Regional)
Yes
No
15 Comments about anything on this page? (optional)
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
These Questions are Specifically for SCCA Racers.
16 *Are you a Regional or National Competitor?
Regional
National
Both Regional and National
17 *Participating in SCCA events, how would you rate your personal experience competing at an SCCA race?
1 Excellent
2 Good
3 Fair
4 Needs Improvement
5 Very Dissatisfied N/A
Event Organization
Competency of Officials
Amount of Track Time
Level of Competition
Ability of organization to competently classify/equalize cars in your class
18 *Please note the type of racing you do.
Formula Cars
Sports Racer
GT Class
Production Class
Showroom Stock/Touring
Spec Miata
Improved Touring (IT)
Other, please specify
19 *Please note the specific classes you race in.
FORMULA MAZDA
FORMULA E
FORMULA ATLANTIC
C SPORTS
D SPORTS
GT1
GT2
GT3
GTL
E-PRODUCTION
F-PRODUCTION
SSB
SSC
T3
Spec Miata
ITS
ITA
IT7
Other, please specify
20 Comments about anything on this page? (optional)
MAZDASPEED MOTORSPORTS SURVEY
Questions marked with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
As some of you may know, MAZDASPEED Motorsports and the leadership/management of the Sports Car Club of America (the Club) have had some difficult situations recently. Earlier this year, SCCA approved a suspension option package (MS-R) for the Mazda MX-5 for SSB class competition in 2007. Within two months, after some of our Mazda racers had purchased a 2007 MX-5, the option package, and raced with the option package, SCCA wrongly decided the package would not be legal for competition in 2007.
-
In October of this year at the SCCA Runoffs, one of our MAZDASPEED staff, there to support the Mazda competitiors at the event, was told by a prominent member of SCCA’s Board of Directors that “SCCA doesn’t need Mazda and Mazda doesn’t need SCCA". As you can imagine we were shocked that the club leadership felt this way about MAZDASPEED involvement.
-
Normally in the course of business relationships, when someone discounts your contribution to the point of saying we don’t need you, you take your business elsewhere. While that was our first reaction, it doesn’t take into consideration you, our customers and team members. These difficulties have affected many of our Mazda Team Support members and we have been working through them with your best interest as our #1 priority.
-
The long term commitment MAZDASPEED has made to our members and the results of these support programs has benefited Mazda as well. Mazda’s market share for street vehicles among club members is 3 times our industry average. Mazda is the most raced brand within the club, in fact over 50% based on the latest results. We benefit greatly by having team members as advocates for our vehicles as family and friends ask you what car to purchase. For all this support, we thank you.
-
Please read the following five (5) statements carefully and decide which one fits your feelings the best, then respond by clicking the box next to that statement. Please respond to only one link and respond only once. We would also appreciate any comments and suggestions you have on the matter and have provided a comment section for you to give any feedback. If you would like to copy any leadership of the club on your response, please feel free to do so. We suggest that your forward your comments to the National office as well as your local SCCA Region Executive.
-
While these choices don’t go into specific detail, they will give us an indication of the direction you (our customer) would like us to take and where we should apply our support. Please understand any support not given to SCCA in the future will still be invested into amateur (grass roots) racing. Our vision is to expand our position in this area, not pull back.
-
Again, thank you for your support in making MAZDASPEED Motorsports Development a great success and Mazda a success in the market place. We value your business and loyalty.
21 * MAZDASPEED is considering building stronger ties with other racing organizations such as NASA and scaling back involvement with SCCA. Please let us know if you support this idea. Following, are five statements, Please read all five statements and then select the one you MOST agree with.
1. Please continue the same level of support to SCCA Club Racing, I am satisfied with the Club and its leadership and plan to continue participating in SCCA events.
2. Please continue the same level of support to SCCA Club Racing. As a Mazdaspeed Motorsports Development member, I will get personally involved with club management to seek a solution to the current situation. If necessary, I will seek club office to protect the relationship between SCCA and with Mazdaspeed Motorsports.
3. I do not approve of the way SCCA Club Racing’s management and officials have acted or their comments. Don’t reward this bad behavior, but also don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Examine alternative places to compete with Mazdaspeed (i.e. NASA or other grass roots organizations) and keep me advised. At this point I do not have any available options for racing with alternative racing organizations and am limited to the SCCA. If Mazdaspeed withdraws its support from SCCA Club Racing I will be negatively impacted as I have no other place to race. I will support Mazdaspeed Motorsports by getting personally involved with club management to seek a solution to the current situation.
4. I do not approve of the way SCCA Club Racing’s management and officials have acted or their comments. There are other racing organizations in my area and I will consider participating with them as an alternative or in addition to SCCA. I can compete with anyone (NASA, SCCA, Mazda Owners Club, etc.), but I would prefer to have as many options as possible.
5. Stop all involvement with SCCA Club Racing as soon as possible (2008 season). I have an alternative racing organization where I can compete that is better. I feel that Mazdaspeed’s involvement in that organization will be more appreciated. In my response I will tell you where the support should be directed.
22 Comments? (optional)
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Not really. NASA is what it is. From the outside it looks like they have had significant issues over the past few years and I can tell you for 100% certainty that as some of their class poularity grws, they will have to make changes to accomodate that growth - at the expense of the people who were there at the core. There is no escaping it.
For me, the biggest factor may be that the New England has one of the biggest and best club racing programs in the country, yet NASA is not even a serious option up here. It probably has just as much to do with track availability than it does the realative strength of the NARRC, NERRC, NYSRRC and MARRS series.
Carlos Gutierrez
New member
Andy ;
Understand your position and your dedication to the SCCA. Us folks down here in South/Central Florida would also have long tows to Georgia-Alabama-the Carolinas, to race NASA.
Having said that, this issue is far bigger and greater than Mazda vs SCCA BOD re the double cross on the SSB Miata trunk kit option and the "we don't need you - you don't need us" comment from a SCCA board member.
Having purchased Mazda racing parts ever since Damon Barnett ran the entire Mazda racing department with just one secretary (Dec. 1978), I have seen the steady growth and expansion of Mazda's involvement with SCCA and grassroots racing across the country. No other Manufacturer can compare with the support Mazda provides their amateur Club racers.
At this time, they are sounding a call to arms in order to help them justify their existence and involvement in SCCA. Of course there are politics involved. Of course we are being positioned as pawns in a chess game. But there is a bigger picture here and it is more serious than the above example. Robert Davis as Sr. VP of Mazda Racing put his neck on the line for his racers. He involved the Mazda 'Motors' folks to help facilitate the trunk kit option (according to SCCA's rules and guidance) and the BOD shot him in the back after their own people had agreed to the legal written procedures Mazda followed. This is the latest of MANY similar conflicts between Mazda and the SCCA executive staff and BOD's. The results of this is that Mazda 'Corporate' is very upset with Comp for allowing themselves and their involvement to be continually 'bitch slapped' by the SCCA.
At this time every Mazda racer across the land must fill out and return their surveys AND send a letter supporting Mazda Comp and whatever decision they have for their future plans. Bottom line, We need Mazda Comp and SCCA needs us. We all need to back our 'golden goose'. Don't take their money and support for granted (gratitude). If Mazda Corporate decides to adjust their budget and more appease the 'Motors' folks; " to sell more cars we need more media & print ads or we need more rebates and incentives to the customer", that means less money to the racing department. That means WE get screwed. Thats not the way Tim Buck, et all is playing it but we all know how this corporate game is played. Mazda Comp is fighting for it's existence as we today know and enjoy it. We need to support them in their dealings with SCCA.
Why ? 'cause it's in our own best interests.
Remember, this is not a Division/Regional issue, purely a SCCA executive and Board of Directors issue with Mazda Comp. I give no support to the group that is presently in charge of policy and final decisions at SCCA.
soap off ;
Carlos Gutierrez
Understand your position and your dedication to the SCCA. Us folks down here in South/Central Florida would also have long tows to Georgia-Alabama-the Carolinas, to race NASA.
Having said that, this issue is far bigger and greater than Mazda vs SCCA BOD re the double cross on the SSB Miata trunk kit option and the "we don't need you - you don't need us" comment from a SCCA board member.
Having purchased Mazda racing parts ever since Damon Barnett ran the entire Mazda racing department with just one secretary (Dec. 1978), I have seen the steady growth and expansion of Mazda's involvement with SCCA and grassroots racing across the country. No other Manufacturer can compare with the support Mazda provides their amateur Club racers.
At this time, they are sounding a call to arms in order to help them justify their existence and involvement in SCCA. Of course there are politics involved. Of course we are being positioned as pawns in a chess game. But there is a bigger picture here and it is more serious than the above example. Robert Davis as Sr. VP of Mazda Racing put his neck on the line for his racers. He involved the Mazda 'Motors' folks to help facilitate the trunk kit option (according to SCCA's rules and guidance) and the BOD shot him in the back after their own people had agreed to the legal written procedures Mazda followed. This is the latest of MANY similar conflicts between Mazda and the SCCA executive staff and BOD's. The results of this is that Mazda 'Corporate' is very upset with Comp for allowing themselves and their involvement to be continually 'bitch slapped' by the SCCA.
At this time every Mazda racer across the land must fill out and return their surveys AND send a letter supporting Mazda Comp and whatever decision they have for their future plans. Bottom line, We need Mazda Comp and SCCA needs us. We all need to back our 'golden goose'. Don't take their money and support for granted (gratitude). If Mazda Corporate decides to adjust their budget and more appease the 'Motors' folks; " to sell more cars we need more media & print ads or we need more rebates and incentives to the customer", that means less money to the racing department. That means WE get screwed. Thats not the way Tim Buck, et all is playing it but we all know how this corporate game is played. Mazda Comp is fighting for it's existence as we today know and enjoy it. We need to support them in their dealings with SCCA.
Why ? 'cause it's in our own best interests.
Remember, this is not a Division/Regional issue, purely a SCCA executive and Board of Directors issue with Mazda Comp. I give no support to the group that is presently in charge of policy and final decisions at SCCA.
soap off ;
Carlos Gutierrez
Matt Rowe
New member
Carlos, unless you've heard something different there has been no discussion about a reduction in Mazda's support or spending, just moving it from one group to another. I'm sure NASA would welcome them with open arms as most will readily acknowledge NASA is run like a business and would foolish to turn away the cash cow that Mazda represents.
What I am curious about is how the other manufacturers feel about this. It is one thing for Mazda to go race somewhere else, but if the remaining mfgs don't migrate then what is the point for Mazda? Is it really worth it to them to have a major presence in a group with no other mfg's? How much PR do you get out of being the top 1 of 1 manufacturers? If no other mfgs participaties it's not too impressive and keeping in mind that NASA is a business they will have an interesting time trying to balance sponsor money vs a level playing field especially when Mazda has the bigger pockets over the long term. Would anyone else feel like they will get a fair deal with NASA?
What I am curious about is how the other manufacturers feel about this. It is one thing for Mazda to go race somewhere else, but if the remaining mfgs don't migrate then what is the point for Mazda? Is it really worth it to them to have a major presence in a group with no other mfg's? How much PR do you get out of being the top 1 of 1 manufacturers? If no other mfgs participaties it's not too impressive and keeping in mind that NASA is a business they will have an interesting time trying to balance sponsor money vs a level playing field especially when Mazda has the bigger pockets over the long term. Would anyone else feel like they will get a fair deal with NASA?
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Carlos,
I understand your points and agree with them to alarge extend. My post may have been taken singularly as it was just a response to Trav's question regarding my first post in this thread.
I understand your points and agree with them to alarge extend. My post may have been taken singularly as it was just a response to Trav's question regarding my first post in this thread.
Some thoughts, although I've asked around to see if MazdaSpeeders who are NOT SCCA members got the same survey. It would be significant if they did NOT...
Again, without knowing who got the survey, it's difficult to decode the intent of this. If in fact the survey went to EVERY MazdaSpeed member, then it could be as simple as it seems. If not, that's important. It's not an accident that SCCA is first on the list and NASA is second. People who create surveys but don't actively strategize against telegraphing their intent very often put the responses that they care about most first in the list, regardless of whether they are positive or negative.
This item also presumes that the respondent has a "primary racing organization." I'm a member of both organizations and while I ran more SCCA than NASA events, I don't know that my desired response - that I am not primarily affiliated with just one group - is there to choose.
The interesting thing here is that I THINK MazdaSpeed supports individual racers with the same basic program (parts, etc.) regardless of the sanction under which they race, right? If so, what is MazdaSpeed's interest in any of those individuals changing their primary affiliation (to the degree that they have one)? This is troublesome. If MazdaSpeed isn't supporting SCCA as an organization - and Tim's comments are about the racer as "customer" - then what's up?
The "profile" items (deleted here; about which other sanctioning bodies, how many races, etc.) help the developer to decide how much weight should be put on any given response. If someone only ran one Regional, then they aren't as "important" to planning decisions as someone who runs a full season of Nationals and the RubOffs.
Again - VERY telling. They've already asked what other organizations the respondent has raced with, but now want to know specifically about NASA. Not an accident, suggesting that this is what they really care about. (Probably not a surprise to anyone who's looked at this.) This is also an opportunity for branching logic...
...and since this looks like it's a new page, it suggests that the following questions are indeed presented using adaptive logic - the following items being based on responses on the previous page. I'm going to guess that Ron checked "No" - that he had never participated in a NASA event.
...and Ron checked "Yes" to item 14, I'll bet. New pages follows.
It really strikes me that no place to this point has the respondent been asked about MazdaSpeed's service or support. It is really a window into the thinking of whoever developed this, that they would presume to survey SCCA members re: their satisfaction with event organization and other aspects of the SCCA's racing program. This suggests that they think that something here is within their sphere of influence - that they can effect change on the SCCA, or on the choices that members are making with respect to their participation in SCCA events. NOBODY in their right mind surveys a group of people about something that the surveyor's organization can't influence - or that they don't think they can influence.
Now, we don't know if some other branch might ask the same about NHRA competitors' satisfaction with THEIR events. It's possible and if they did, it would be meaningful. If they don't, it's more meaningful in ways that folks here are likely to care about.
First a hint: If you are taking a selected-response test and truly to NOT know which is the correct answer, pick the longest response. Since there is no "right" or "wrong" answer in this case, the fact that response #3 is quite a bit longer and more detailed than the other options strongly suggests to me that this is what the survey developer wants you to choose. Further, since it represents an action, it is not a stretch to infer that this is the action that he/she wants you to take.
This is reinforced by the fact that the last line (the action they are asking you to undertake) of both #2 and #3 are essentially the same. Response 3 is response 2 with a big stick, but with qualifiers. It's not "I'm breaking up with you," but instead is "I'm thinking about breaking up with you and just might, if you don't change your ways." The desired outcome is not a break-up, but instead is a change of behaviors.
* * *
At the end of this, I am left with the strong impression that the motivation behind the instrument is to leverage past commitment to MazdaSpeed members, to get them to exert pressure to effect change on the current leadership of SCCA.
There's no direct intimation that Mazda corporate media buys (SportsCar, coverage of SPEED Touring or GT races, etc.) are in jeopardy. Were there to be - and I am pointed not saying this is the case - it would be a whole 'nother level of coercion, that would strongly suggest that indeed, Mazda views its commitment of those monies as buying them some consideration in terms of Club Racing involvement. Had there been items included that asked about how often the respondent watched TV coverage of motor sports events "sponsored" by Zoom Zoom ads, I'd be worried about this but given what is said here, I'm not.
I'm still struggling because I don't understand what this "support" for SCCA is, that keeps getting mentioned, beyond the regular MazdaSpeed member deal. Some clarity here would be helpful - contingency money that's better than NASA folks get? But that's not something the Club gets - that's for Mazda entrants. Event sponsorship? "Support" sounds like it should be something that's good for the whole organization...?
If we are talking simply about the benefit afforded to the Club by some nominal increase in entries or entrants, that might be ascribed to Mazda's support of individual racers, there's some huge presumptions there. How many MazdaSpeed members would not still be racing at their current levels of commitment (in a Mazda or something else for that matter) absent the membership benefits? I honestly don't know.
Nope. Everything considered, I think that Mazda is simply PO'd at the current leadership, over what might be very real inequities, and are using this survey as a veiled threat to activate SCCA members to their cause - to punish the decision makers responsible. It is an interesting question, whether their calling in this favor from the Club members who have benefited individually from MazdaSpeed support is the same as "buying favors" or "having the club in their pocket." Frankly, I think the line is pretty darned thin.
K
Again, without knowing who got the survey, it's difficult to decode the intent of this. If in fact the survey went to EVERY MazdaSpeed member, then it could be as simple as it seems. If not, that's important. It's not an accident that SCCA is first on the list and NASA is second. People who create surveys but don't actively strategize against telegraphing their intent very often put the responses that they care about most first in the list, regardless of whether they are positive or negative.
This item also presumes that the respondent has a "primary racing organization." I'm a member of both organizations and while I ran more SCCA than NASA events, I don't know that my desired response - that I am not primarily affiliated with just one group - is there to choose.
The interesting thing here is that I THINK MazdaSpeed supports individual racers with the same basic program (parts, etc.) regardless of the sanction under which they race, right? If so, what is MazdaSpeed's interest in any of those individuals changing their primary affiliation (to the degree that they have one)? This is troublesome. If MazdaSpeed isn't supporting SCCA as an organization - and Tim's comments are about the racer as "customer" - then what's up?
The "profile" items (deleted here; about which other sanctioning bodies, how many races, etc.) help the developer to decide how much weight should be put on any given response. If someone only ran one Regional, then they aren't as "important" to planning decisions as someone who runs a full season of Nationals and the RubOffs.
Again - VERY telling. They've already asked what other organizations the respondent has raced with, but now want to know specifically about NASA. Not an accident, suggesting that this is what they really care about. (Probably not a surprise to anyone who's looked at this.) This is also an opportunity for branching logic...
...and since this looks like it's a new page, it suggests that the following questions are indeed presented using adaptive logic - the following items being based on responses on the previous page. I'm going to guess that Ron checked "No" - that he had never participated in a NASA event.
...and Ron checked "Yes" to item 14, I'll bet. New pages follows.
It really strikes me that no place to this point has the respondent been asked about MazdaSpeed's service or support. It is really a window into the thinking of whoever developed this, that they would presume to survey SCCA members re: their satisfaction with event organization and other aspects of the SCCA's racing program. This suggests that they think that something here is within their sphere of influence - that they can effect change on the SCCA, or on the choices that members are making with respect to their participation in SCCA events. NOBODY in their right mind surveys a group of people about something that the surveyor's organization can't influence - or that they don't think they can influence.
Now, we don't know if some other branch might ask the same about NHRA competitors' satisfaction with THEIR events. It's possible and if they did, it would be meaningful. If they don't, it's more meaningful in ways that folks here are likely to care about.
First a hint: If you are taking a selected-response test and truly to NOT know which is the correct answer, pick the longest response. Since there is no "right" or "wrong" answer in this case, the fact that response #3 is quite a bit longer and more detailed than the other options strongly suggests to me that this is what the survey developer wants you to choose. Further, since it represents an action, it is not a stretch to infer that this is the action that he/she wants you to take.
This is reinforced by the fact that the last line (the action they are asking you to undertake) of both #2 and #3 are essentially the same. Response 3 is response 2 with a big stick, but with qualifiers. It's not "I'm breaking up with you," but instead is "I'm thinking about breaking up with you and just might, if you don't change your ways." The desired outcome is not a break-up, but instead is a change of behaviors.
* * *
At the end of this, I am left with the strong impression that the motivation behind the instrument is to leverage past commitment to MazdaSpeed members, to get them to exert pressure to effect change on the current leadership of SCCA.
There's no direct intimation that Mazda corporate media buys (SportsCar, coverage of SPEED Touring or GT races, etc.) are in jeopardy. Were there to be - and I am pointed not saying this is the case - it would be a whole 'nother level of coercion, that would strongly suggest that indeed, Mazda views its commitment of those monies as buying them some consideration in terms of Club Racing involvement. Had there been items included that asked about how often the respondent watched TV coverage of motor sports events "sponsored" by Zoom Zoom ads, I'd be worried about this but given what is said here, I'm not.
I'm still struggling because I don't understand what this "support" for SCCA is, that keeps getting mentioned, beyond the regular MazdaSpeed member deal. Some clarity here would be helpful - contingency money that's better than NASA folks get? But that's not something the Club gets - that's for Mazda entrants. Event sponsorship? "Support" sounds like it should be something that's good for the whole organization...?
If we are talking simply about the benefit afforded to the Club by some nominal increase in entries or entrants, that might be ascribed to Mazda's support of individual racers, there's some huge presumptions there. How many MazdaSpeed members would not still be racing at their current levels of commitment (in a Mazda or something else for that matter) absent the membership benefits? I honestly don't know.
Nope. Everything considered, I think that Mazda is simply PO'd at the current leadership, over what might be very real inequities, and are using this survey as a veiled threat to activate SCCA members to their cause - to punish the decision makers responsible. It is an interesting question, whether their calling in this favor from the Club members who have benefited individually from MazdaSpeed support is the same as "buying favors" or "having the club in their pocket." Frankly, I think the line is pretty darned thin.
K
Bill Miller
New member
Nice analysis Kirk, thanks. 
Ron Earp
Administrator
Hey Kirk,
My answers were as you guessed with respect to the questions. I checked the Zoomerang site and their surveys can support logic branching. There were four pages of questions on the survey and you can tell when one page ends since the page concludes with "Any comments on this page?"
Good analysis there.
Ron
My answers were as you guessed with respect to the questions. I checked the Zoomerang site and their surveys can support logic branching. There were four pages of questions on the survey and you can tell when one page ends since the page concludes with "Any comments on this page?"
Good analysis there.
Ron
More info - it's been suggested in the Sandbox that (as I thought was the case) Mazdaspeed support is indeed the same for NASA drivers as it is for SCCA drivers.
If this is the case, then Mazda can't for all practical purposes take its support from SCCA and "move it" to NASA. It can probably get SCCA members pissed off enough to do its bidding to chase the current leadership out of power, as revenge for lousy treatment (the SSB thing, personal slights, or other issues); and it might be able to scare some folks into looking at NASA as an alternative, motivated by the same thinking.
However, unless the Mazdaspeed membership rules change and SCCA drivers are treated less well than NASA drivers - or are made ineligible for program benefits completely - I'm having difficulty understanding where the stick is.
K
Edit - Further, one has to presume that the cost/benefit math nets a positive as far as Mazda is concerned: They get their money's worth somehow. Mazdaspeed is not an altruistic venture, a reality that figures into further consideration and conversation on the subject...
If this is the case, then Mazda can't for all practical purposes take its support from SCCA and "move it" to NASA. It can probably get SCCA members pissed off enough to do its bidding to chase the current leadership out of power, as revenge for lousy treatment (the SSB thing, personal slights, or other issues); and it might be able to scare some folks into looking at NASA as an alternative, motivated by the same thinking.
However, unless the Mazdaspeed membership rules change and SCCA drivers are treated less well than NASA drivers - or are made ineligible for program benefits completely - I'm having difficulty understanding where the stick is.
K
Edit - Further, one has to presume that the cost/benefit math nets a positive as far as Mazda is concerned: They get their money's worth somehow. Mazdaspeed is not an altruistic venture, a reality that figures into further consideration and conversation on the subject...
Matt Rowe
New member
Kirk, I was already wondering about Mazda's ability to exclude SCCA or include NASA and came to the same conclusion. Short of requiring a NASA membership number before any order is placed it's not practical to prevent SCCA racers from participating in the Mazdaspeed deals/program. Even then a token annual fee to NASA each year would still allow SCCA racers to have the same opportunities.
However, I would imagine there are some actions Mazda could take. Off the top of my head:
Pulling the MX-5 cup from Pro
Backing out of Speed GT & Touring Car (to go where?)
No support at Runoff's
No SCCA class specific packages such as SS/T packages (again where would the cars be raced)
No organized support/parts for IT, prod (?) and SM (yeah right)
Contigency money
Without the other mfg's moving with them it almost appears that Mazda's departure would decrease their visibility while largely maintaining the same support to the current racers. So the net affect MIGHT be worse for Mazda as it is for us. There are still long term issues and the impact on the trust other mfg's would have in us but in the more immediate term it's may just be extremely embarassing, not fatal.
Also, I'm not aware of any group with a comparable Solo program nor is their one on the way. I suspect that is a substantial part of the mazda program as well. Walking away from that would likely be a loss that would be hard to replace.
The short answer is they need us, we need to stop pissing off customers/partners.
However, I would imagine there are some actions Mazda could take. Off the top of my head:
Pulling the MX-5 cup from Pro
Backing out of Speed GT & Touring Car (to go where?)
No support at Runoff's
No SCCA class specific packages such as SS/T packages (again where would the cars be raced)
No organized support/parts for IT, prod (?) and SM (yeah right)
Contigency money
Without the other mfg's moving with them it almost appears that Mazda's departure would decrease their visibility while largely maintaining the same support to the current racers. So the net affect MIGHT be worse for Mazda as it is for us. There are still long term issues and the impact on the trust other mfg's would have in us but in the more immediate term it's may just be extremely embarassing, not fatal.
Also, I'm not aware of any group with a comparable Solo program nor is their one on the way. I suspect that is a substantial part of the mazda program as well. Walking away from that would likely be a loss that would be hard to replace.
The short answer is they need us, we need to stop pissing off customers/partners.
mbuskuhl
New member
I'm gonna disagree, define "support"... - access to parts, pricing, and contingency
I would concur that MAZDASPEED "supports" both NASA and SCCA drivers equally in terms of access to parts, both comp and OEM, and pricing on these items. The "support" is different with contingency, MAZDASPEED only provides contingency for the NASA Championships where they provide money for SCCA not only at the Runoffs but throughout the year... http://www.mazdamotorsports.com/webapp/wcs...o/2007_cont.pdf
The payouts to SCCA drivers are grossly more than that to NASA drivers.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
I think events like this cause Mazda...or any business partner, to think big picture. "What do we really get from this relationship? What does it really cost us?? Is there a way to allocate those resources more effectively??"
If YOU went to do a job for someone, they told you how to do it, then they changed their minds and told you you wouldn't get payed, you'd feel double crossed, and be rightfully upset. While that's not exactly what Mazda has said happened here, it's pretty equivilent.They operated on good faith, followed the rules, then saw no return. Lose lose.
They are in this for recognition, credibility and the difficult to measure referals. If they don't see that those goals are being reached, they need to question the effectiveness of the relationship.
"Should we pull the staffing that develops the SCCA packages? The staffing that deals with the inventory numbers and the support? That interfaces with the club personel? That goes out and finds sources and suppliers, and negotiates contracts with them? Should we forget about advertising with this club at their events? Should we not waste the money sending the truck and the personell to their events? Maybe our dollars would go further in other areas, like import drag racing, or drifting? Maybe we can trust those organizations more. "
The simple fact is that Mazda spend a lot of time and money doing things that don't always bring a return, and even if they do, it's really hard to track. Do you think they made money last year on the 1st gen ITA brake duct kit? Ummm...doubt it. Made a referral from it? Who knows...maybe.
But, when your business partner screws you, you have to examine the relationship and determine if you are getting enough out of the deal to contiinue....basically, you need to make sure you don't cut your nose off to spite your face.
I think Matt hit it earlier..thier "support" goes much deeper than a "Comp number".
If YOU went to do a job for someone, they told you how to do it, then they changed their minds and told you you wouldn't get payed, you'd feel double crossed, and be rightfully upset. While that's not exactly what Mazda has said happened here, it's pretty equivilent.They operated on good faith, followed the rules, then saw no return. Lose lose.
They are in this for recognition, credibility and the difficult to measure referals. If they don't see that those goals are being reached, they need to question the effectiveness of the relationship.
"Should we pull the staffing that develops the SCCA packages? The staffing that deals with the inventory numbers and the support? That interfaces with the club personel? That goes out and finds sources and suppliers, and negotiates contracts with them? Should we forget about advertising with this club at their events? Should we not waste the money sending the truck and the personell to their events? Maybe our dollars would go further in other areas, like import drag racing, or drifting? Maybe we can trust those organizations more. "
The simple fact is that Mazda spend a lot of time and money doing things that don't always bring a return, and even if they do, it's really hard to track. Do you think they made money last year on the 1st gen ITA brake duct kit? Ummm...doubt it. Made a referral from it? Who knows...maybe.
But, when your business partner screws you, you have to examine the relationship and determine if you are getting enough out of the deal to contiinue....basically, you need to make sure you don't cut your nose off to spite your face.
I think Matt hit it earlier..thier "support" goes much deeper than a "Comp number".
dickita15
New member
Jake,
You seem to be accepting a version of what happened after hearing one side of the story, a recounting of a conversation between two people from one of them.
Some random thoughts on all of this.
I still think the attributed quote “SCCA does not need Mazda and Mazda does not need SCCA” may or may not be appropriate depending on what was said just before that.
I am told by my Director that he Director that is claimed to have said this denies that is what he said. I was told it was not the director accused in the Prod thread and was not my director.
I suggested that the BOD should make a public statement of the facts as they know them but that may not be a good idea as the Chairman of the BOD has a meeting scheduled with the President of Mazda in the next couple of weeks and if that public statement disputes the facts as laid out by Mazda the statement might just add more insult rather than solve the problem. I think at this point I would rather have the problem fixed than have a full accounting. After all no possible explanation would satisfy the “SCCA is always wrong” crowd that hangs out on some of the internet boards.
I am thrilled to be a customer of Mazdaspeed. The convenience, pricing and advice I have received have been wonderful. I am always happy when Tim answers the phone because his knowledge of what I want is top of the line. Twice I have seriously considered changing cars in the last 8 year because the Rx7 is less than competitive in ITA and in both cases I decided to not change in part because I hate giving up Mazda’s help.
But as a regional racer the only support I get is this service. Mazda’s contingency program has no direct effect on me.
What does SCCA on a national level get form Mazda? Well Pro gets a fee for running the MX5 series, but I understand that that is already scheduled to end.
Mazda buys ads on WC airings and while none of that money goes to SCCA it does make it easier to convince Speed to air the shows.
Mazda does provide some sponsorship for various awards dinners and such similar to what Hawk or Simpson might do.
And most importantly Mazdaspeed support makes it easier to race which translates in to more racers which is good for the club.
But Mazda with a great as their contribution to the sport is does not subsidize SCCA.
The relationship between Mazda and SCCA is business. It ain’t personal, it is just business. In order for a business relationship it has to be profitable for both parties. Neither side can win every time.
You seem to be accepting a version of what happened after hearing one side of the story, a recounting of a conversation between two people from one of them.
Some random thoughts on all of this.
I still think the attributed quote “SCCA does not need Mazda and Mazda does not need SCCA” may or may not be appropriate depending on what was said just before that.
I am told by my Director that he Director that is claimed to have said this denies that is what he said. I was told it was not the director accused in the Prod thread and was not my director.
I suggested that the BOD should make a public statement of the facts as they know them but that may not be a good idea as the Chairman of the BOD has a meeting scheduled with the President of Mazda in the next couple of weeks and if that public statement disputes the facts as laid out by Mazda the statement might just add more insult rather than solve the problem. I think at this point I would rather have the problem fixed than have a full accounting. After all no possible explanation would satisfy the “SCCA is always wrong” crowd that hangs out on some of the internet boards.
I am thrilled to be a customer of Mazdaspeed. The convenience, pricing and advice I have received have been wonderful. I am always happy when Tim answers the phone because his knowledge of what I want is top of the line. Twice I have seriously considered changing cars in the last 8 year because the Rx7 is less than competitive in ITA and in both cases I decided to not change in part because I hate giving up Mazda’s help.
But as a regional racer the only support I get is this service. Mazda’s contingency program has no direct effect on me.
What does SCCA on a national level get form Mazda? Well Pro gets a fee for running the MX5 series, but I understand that that is already scheduled to end.
Mazda buys ads on WC airings and while none of that money goes to SCCA it does make it easier to convince Speed to air the shows.
Mazda does provide some sponsorship for various awards dinners and such similar to what Hawk or Simpson might do.
And most importantly Mazdaspeed support makes it easier to race which translates in to more racers which is good for the club.
But Mazda with a great as their contribution to the sport is does not subsidize SCCA.
The relationship between Mazda and SCCA is business. It ain’t personal, it is just business. In order for a business relationship it has to be profitable for both parties. Neither side can win every time.
Mazmarc63
New member
Having purchased Mazda racing parts ever since Damon Barnett ran the entire Mazda racing department with just one secretary (Dec. 1978), I have seen the steady growth and expansion of Mazda's involvement with SCCA and grassroots racing across the country. No other Manufacturer can compare with the support Mazda provides their amateur Club racers.
God you're old.
***The relationship between Mazda and SCCA is business. It ain’t personal, it is just business. In order for a business relationship it has to be profitable for both parties. Neither side can win every time.***
Dick, not to argue with you or anyone else BUT it is "real personal" when a SCCA BoD member runs his mouth at a SCCA member. The friken SCCA BoD, CRB & Jim J. need to remember that they are in a business with ALL SCCA members who are the customer & they are the vendor. It appears that for many years they (SCCA boards & pres.) don't have this business clue & they prove it over & over.
I'll will take what Tim Buck (SCCA member) said as a reasonable staement. You know NO ONE from the SCCA (SCCA boards & pres.) is ever going to come close to saying anything that we might believe factual. Forget about the business partner deal for a moment because it's always called a business partner untill one or the other of the partners screws the other business partner.
Have Fun
David
Dick, not to argue with you or anyone else BUT it is "real personal" when a SCCA BoD member runs his mouth at a SCCA member. The friken SCCA BoD, CRB & Jim J. need to remember that they are in a business with ALL SCCA members who are the customer & they are the vendor. It appears that for many years they (SCCA boards & pres.) don't have this business clue & they prove it over & over.
I'll will take what Tim Buck (SCCA member) said as a reasonable staement. You know NO ONE from the SCCA (SCCA boards & pres.) is ever going to come close to saying anything that we might believe factual. Forget about the business partner deal for a moment because it's always called a business partner untill one or the other of the partners screws the other business partner.
Have Fun
David
So, let me get this straight:
Solstice Hardtop - available or not available to the public from the manufacturer? And please note that, just because a dealer doesn't know about it, it doesn't mean that it isn't available to the public. I.e. Has ANYONE gone to a dealer, inquired and, when/if told no such beast exists, had the "you want fries with that" sales person check with Pontiac? I've dealt with new car sales staff and I wouldn't trust them to know whether the car comes with tires let alone with a carbon fiber top that 99.999% of its customers won't want or even ask about.
MX5 package - was it available to the general public before the cutoff date or not?
Those are the only things that matter in this discussion. If the answer's are yes to 1 and no to 2, then Mazda has no legitimate beef. If the answers aren't yes =1 and 2 = no, then Mazda might.
Solstice Hardtop - available or not available to the public from the manufacturer? And please note that, just because a dealer doesn't know about it, it doesn't mean that it isn't available to the public. I.e. Has ANYONE gone to a dealer, inquired and, when/if told no such beast exists, had the "you want fries with that" sales person check with Pontiac? I've dealt with new car sales staff and I wouldn't trust them to know whether the car comes with tires let alone with a carbon fiber top that 99.999% of its customers won't want or even ask about.
MX5 package - was it available to the general public before the cutoff date or not?
Those are the only things that matter in this discussion. If the answer's are yes to 1 and no to 2, then Mazda has no legitimate beef. If the answers aren't yes =1 and 2 = no, then Mazda might.
Carlos Gutierrez
New member
With all due respect to you and Kirk above ; you casual observers are not being requested to say or do anything.
Only registered Mazdaspeed members. They are the one's whose best interests are in question and should respond to defend their best interests.
and to you Mr Marc ... yes, I am older than dirt ... but still young enough to get into that silver bullet of yours and lower your lap time by half a second
remember the '99 Moroso ECR; you in the SpeedSource/Mears Rx7 , me in the Sabol Rx7 .... last lap pass on the inside ... for position !! I still do, not yet old enough to forget
Be well,
Carlos G.
Mazmarc63
New member
remember the '99 Moroso ECR; you in the SpeedSource/Mears Rx7 , me in the Sabol Rx7 .... last lap pass on the inside ... for position !! I still do, not yet old enough to forget
I always hated that track.
Miss you man.
To stay on topic, I sent my survey this morning. I am a Mazda guy to the bone. My Dad always told me "because is not a reason" but I "side" with Mazda just "because".