Super Special Stages ?

[L5->R5/CR]

WTF?

23 to 20 to stay?

[klm-607]

GO! SSS do nothing but "dumb down" the sport, & take away from the overall
point of rallying. It's like "NASCARizing" Rallying. NO THANKS! True Rally fans will trek anywhere & evreywhere to watch the sport, & in any weather!

[JAM]

Go, SSS have nothing to do with rallying...

It depends. If you're talking about rallying 10 years ago, then you're right.

But we are in 2007, rallying needs sponsors and need to go to the "ordinary" people that are not true rally fans, all this effort to give ROI to the sponsors. On this Poit of view the SSS are welcome, but without stupid ideias as the SSS in Buenos Aires 750km away from the HQ. Another dumb ideia would be to have more than 2 or 3 SSS in a rally. Rallying is on the roads, SSS are a kind of extra value to the events.

[Micke_VOC]

One SSS per leg is ok, if they are near the rally area....

Its good for the sponsors, "new public" and media.

[Brother John]

GO! They have nothing to do with rallysport!

If you want a SSS It must not be in a stadium!
If you want to see SSS then move to rallycross!

[Jaanus]

I voted for stay for the same reason many have pointed out. Without sponsors rally would not exist like it does today and many privateers would stay at home. The SS stages are important for sponsors and the casual fans who don't have the possibility to go to the forest. They do not do any harm for the sport and don't blame the Argentina fiasco on SSS, the problem is the organisation and their stupid decision to move everyone 700 kilometers and back again.

[Roy]

2 sss per event are ok.....its also a good way for new people to come and meet the sport...

each leg one. The rest of your quote:

[Lousada]

Precisely which sponsors are we talking about? Every WRC-car, except Henning Solberg, is sponsored by a car-manufacturer and/or companies that are directly related to cars, for example fuel. These sponsors will sponsor in the WRC no matter what, simply because it's so closely linked to their own business.
Okay, Munchis make ice-cream, but they are selfsponsored so it's not an actual sponsorship. Stobart is a transport company, but they are also not really sponsoring since they set-up their own team. I can't believe they would quit their activities if Superspecials were banned. Now Expert is a little special, they sponsor a driver who doesn't even like Superspecials.

Also how many spectators visit a SSS on average, say 25000. Now many of these are already rallyfans who visit, or would visit a stage anyway, so the actual 'new' spectators is much less. What do you introduce them too? Not rallying, because a Superspecial has little to do with a real rally stage. The rallycars? Well not really, you see them drive, but not at all on their full potential. Tell me, what?
If you really want to introduce people to the sport, try making decent TV-shows that are broadcasted at proper hours on proper channels.

[Josti]

Precisely which sponsors are we talking about? Every WRC-car, except Henning Solberg, is sponsored by a car-manufacturer and/or companies that are directly related to cars, for example fuel. These sponsors will sponsor in the WRC no matter what, simply because it's so closely linked to their own business.
Okay, Munchis make ice-cream, but they are selfsponsored so it's not an actual sponsorship. Stobart is a transport company, but they are also not really sponsoring since they set-up their own team. I can't believe they would quit their activities if Superspecials were banned. Now Expert is a little special, they sponsor a driver who doesn't even like Superspecials.

Spot on

As for my opinion, move SSS.

[VAT205]

I voted for go, the stadium "ROC-like" SSS are boring and theres no need for codrivers so therefore its not rally. Theres nothing "super" about super specials, you wont impress new peeps with that.

SSS are as exciting as the parc ferme, you see the cars, thats it.