Drivers reject TMS boss' oval push [Archive]

evo5_mat

8th June 2008, 00:03

TAKEN FROM AUTOSPORT
Seems like the arguments are starting between drivers and track owners now, with the drivers suprisingly wanting street and road courses, even the more established IRL drivers

Drivers reject TMS boss' oval push

By Jeff Olson Saturday, June 7th 2008, 07:32 GMT

Leading IRL IndyCar Series drivers have dismissed Texas Motor Speedway president Eddie Gossage's suggestion that the championship should stick to ovals for the majority of its schedule.

On Thursday, Gossage said IndyCar's success depended on its schedule remaining "80 percent" oval-based.

Initially an all-oval category, the IRL has steadily introduced more road and street course events since adding St Petersburg, Sears Point and Watkins Glen to its schedule in 2005.

The merger with the Champ Car World Series is set to result in a more event balance of ovals and road circuits in future years - a concept Gossage criticised.

"IndyCar officials have to understand that it will take 80 percent ovals to truly succeed," Gossage told espn.com. "Otherwise, this is nothing more than a niche sport. If they're comfortable with that, fine, but I don't think they are. The Indy 500 and high-speed ovals like TMS are why the IRL won this war."

Some driver scorned his comments, while others simply brushed them off.

"If that's the way he feels, then we shouldn't race here," Tony Kanaan said. "It amazes me that he said that. If somebody who has such good vision and can organise a race as good as this thinks we should be racing on 80 percent ovals, (then he) isn't looking out for the series' best interests. He's looking out for his own interests. We don't need those people around if that's the way they think."

Series points leader and Indianapolis 500 winner Scott Dixon smiled when told of Gossage's opinion.

"Eddie should stick to running his track and let the series run itself," Dixon said. "He's probably a little biased because he's got an oval. Everybody is going to have different views. I'm biased because I like road courses. He's just putting that out there because he and his owners (Speedway Motorsports Inc.) have a long list of racetracks, and most of them are ovals."

Gossage said he is concerned that the IndyCar Series, in the wake of unification with the former Champ Car Series, is preparing to move heavily toward road and street courses.

"Along with all the good this merger brings, the IRL also had to absorb some bad from Champ Car," Gossage said.

"They had to take on some baggage with the transition. But the American public has made it very clear they will not accept European-style road racing. It's not even an arguable point. It's a fact. I'm telling you that would be a big mistake."

The series added street races in Long Beach and Edmonton to its 2008 schedule, making the count 11 ovals, three road courses and four street courses.

The Surfers Paradise and Toronto street courses are also expected to join the calendar in 2009, bringing more balance while possibly threatening some of the weaker oval races.

"If you can go to places where they draw big crowds, I don't know why they would all have to be ovals," Dixon said. "The vibe is with street races."

Other drivers, like Vitor Meira, said the series should maintain ovals as at least 50 percent of the total.

"That's where we have been successful and NASCAR has been successful," Meira said. "We've proven that the American fan likes it, and that's our fan base. It's more entertaining.

"I'm talking only about the business side of it. I'm taking myself out of the equation, because, man, it's dangerous. You can get hurt much easier on ovals. Personally, I'd like to see us race less on ovals, but you have to. Fifty percent of it has to be ovals."

Still others, like Ed Carpenter, leaned more toward Gossage's line of thinking.

"I'm not going to lie; I wouldn't mind if it was all ovals," Carpenter said. "If there were more promoters like Eddie Gossage at the other ovals, that would be an easier decision to make. The problem we have is that a lot of road and street races are profitable events for everybody, but you can't say that about all of the oval events we go to."

Champ Car attempted to race at Texas Motor Speedway in 2001 but cancelled the race when drivers reported bouts of vertigo and some feared losing consciousness as speeds approached 240 mph. Justin Wilson, who circled the 24-degree banking for the first time on Thursday night, said racing at TMS is a daunting challenge for newcomers.

"I can't imagine going 20 mph faster than what we're doing now," Justin Wilson said. "It's already crazy fast. I can understand why they were passing out. You can definitely feel the strains and the G-forces compressing in. It's different to the other tracks we've raced on, where the Gs are lateral. You start to feel the effect."

Wilf

8th June 2008, 04:48

ShiftingGears

8th June 2008, 06:43

I'm glad someones dismissed his claim. An 80% oval series would be ****, to put it frankly.

Albert D. Kallal

8th June 2008, 07:49

It is quite hard to to argue that when champ car (CART) had ratings and audiences as large as NASCAR and that is WHEN we had a mix street and road course and ovals.

When I was watching champ car in the early nineties, I remember I wasn’t too thrilled about the ovals, but I did like a few of them, and of course there was also the Indy 500. On the other hand, there was a solid core group of fans that really loved oval racing, and I thought having ovals was really great for those fans.

On the other hand, many fans liked the road racing. Thus, you had two large groups of people to draw from to make up the fan base. In other words, you had a mix of types of courses, and that allowed you to get both type of fans enjoying and watching the sport.

Right now they’re adding a few more road courses and street courses to the series next year, and I think it will really help the fan base to grow. Goodness for bid, with all ovals, the IRL fan base was going nowhere.

If past history is any indication, a good mix of the type of events is what made CART/champ car rival NASCAR, and even other series around the world in terms of prestige and fan base. (and money too).

The fact that the IRL absorbed a few champ car teams will do absolutely nothing for the fan base ( and sponsorship revenues) if IRL does not deliver a product that much of the open wheel fan base was comprised of **WHEN** it was very successful.

I could never understand this mentality when people say will champ car went bankrupt means that we should not have street/road veneus. yes, they did some things really stupid and poorly, but it does not deny the fact that when CART was doing very well, it had a correct mix of fan base and types of racing courses.

I can remember when apple came out with the Newton, it was a handheld PDA, and it was an absolute market disaster. However the concept of a PDA was a really good idea, and when the palm company came along, every businessman had to have a PDA ( personal digital assistant or electronic daytimer). So, the isssues of a good idea and good racing mix has little relationship to that CART/champ car does not exist anymore.

And no question that some owners of ovals are concerned that they could lose their venues, and that is a rightfully correct concern for them to have.

However it seems to me that if past histories is an indication, when open wheel was doing the best, it was doing so with a pretty much the even mix between the ovals, street, and road courses.

I think this direction will do nothing but help the IRL to grow...

Albert D. Kallal
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
kallal@msn.com

wedge

8th June 2008, 10:03

Obviously it should be a mixture of disciplines but Eddie Gossage is protecting his own interests when TMS could lose out in the future.

JimmyStephans

8th June 2008, 13:24

I think Eddie is correct -- in the long term.

The sports needs cold hard cash to survive and grow and expand. There are more revenue streams from ovals.

Here we are in 2008 and the public has many, many entertainment options. Digital TV with hundreds of stations, Internet sites from forums like this to myspace.com with 73 million members, live entertainment is everywhere -- I split my time between ST Petersburg, FL and Denver, CO.... weekly the newspapers in both are packed full of interesting and entertaining things I can select from.... food festivals, local car and bike races, all sorts of stick and ball sports, and concert after concert after concert, and much more.

IndyCar can entertain the average citizen in just two ways (and thus capture dollars from same). Live at the track or on TV.

Live at the track... some road course venues can sell 30,000 tickets just like some ovals can, but not as many.

Lets call that even... but, lets look closer....

The average fan on a huge road course like Road America buys his ticket, maybe pays to park his car or pays a tad more to park his camper, and makes a weekend out of it.... OFTEN eating food and drinking beer he brought from home.

That same fan, if at an oval, likely isn't bringing his own food and beer. He buys it at the track.

More income for the track in the long term means more for the racers. Bigger purses, etc.

Jump over to the souvenir sales.... At an oval all the cash and credit card carrying fans are condensed into a smaller and more controlled area and can be funneled past the souvenir trailers and booths. Its not the same as on a spread out road course like Road America.

More income for the track in the long term means more for the racers. Bigger purses, etc. And, in the case of souvenirs, more income for the teams and drivers, means more racing and long term success. SIDEBAR: The more souvenirs in circulation, like on little Johnny's ball cap, the more popular the sport slowly becomes. I myself became a racing fan in the early seventies because some other kid in the 6th grade brought some silly red STP stickers to school his dad got at some track. I just had to see who this Granatelli guy was.

Next let us look at advertising -- which through team, driver, event and track sponsorships is king in this sport.

On the cars.... face it, on an oval each car / team sponsor gets more airtime because the cars are grouped tighter... even the cars a lap down end up on TV screen all across America many times during a race because of the tight confines and TV angles and passing. On a road course, less TV time value for the sponsors.

At the track... Same deal. The cost to place a sign along the track at Road America is much less than at Vegas or Texas... why? Simply because the signs at turn two at Road America are shown on TV just a tiny percentage of the time compared to turn two at Vegas. If the tracks can charge more for the advertising signs they have more revenue to increases purses AND to promote the event in the first place. Additionally, those advertising signs in turn two at Vegas are seen all race by the fans in attendence, whereas those in turn two at Road America are viewed by considerably less people, making them less valuable.

On TV... We all know advertising drives TV. The more viewers ESPN / ABC can get watching the more they can charge for advertisements. The more they can gain in revenue the more the IRL can charge for broadcast rights, etc. That of course means that the we as current fans, and the IRL as a sport / business, need to bring in more fans, period.

Oval racing is more fan friendly and TV friendly. Fan friendly because its easy to understand... bunch of guys in fast cars going in a circle for 500 miles, trying to stay in front without crashing and burning, first guy to finish spins donuts, kisses the girl, takes home the most money! Its condensed and easy and entertaining TO NEW FANS on TV and will provide more growth in the long term.

Road courses are tactical, daring and interesting to US -- the people already into IndyCar / CART / F-1 -- but they DO NOT capture new fans that are turning through TV stations on a Sunday afternoon. They do not "grab" the remote from a channel surfer's hand the way a tight oval race, like last night with sparks flying, can. They do not have the power to keep that channel surfer away from American Idol.

Growth in IndyCar will only come from capturing NEW FANS, like NASCAR has done over the last 20 years, not by continuing to service the desires of us old school fans or the drivers themselves.

The truth is that right now NASCAR is king. Unlike 20 years ago it has fans outside the south, it has buckets of female fans, and many more minority fans than it has ever had. The teenage girls that work for me know who Jeff Gordan, Kasey Khane and Kyle Busch are... and so do the boyfriends and little brothers... But when I pointed out Dan Wheldon to two of those same girls in Downtown ST Pete a couple of years ago they had no idea who I was talking about.

Those girls, their boyfriends, and eventually their kids are who we need to capture in the long term to make IndyCar grow. Ovals give us a better chance. Today's youth has the shortest attention span you could imagine. If we don't grab them in milleseconds we often don't get a second chance.

Ovals tend to be more fan friendly and convienent. They are closer to big towns, they have better parking, and it "feels" familar, like going to an NFL game or other stadium event. In Kansas they can get fans to drive west 30-40 minutes to the IRL oval, but not another few miles past that to the Topeka road course where they can see a dozen or more races on an SCCA weekened for less money.

We are "selling" our sport to new people here... thats it, new people... if we want it to grow.

Marketing Guru Clotaire Rapaille teaches us that sales are generated by the process of "lustification and justification". Lustification is the psychological trigger of desire that makes our audience want to buy the product, while justification is merely the rational excuse used to expend resources.

Sparks flying and wheels touching at 200 MPH on that tight oval in Texas creates more "Lust" in the people that are not current fans than the beautiful back ground of Road America.

Having the oval just down the highway, with easy parking, decent food, and a dare devil motorcycle jump, and being able to see the whole track helps "justify" the expenditure for the teenager or 20 something more so than a four hour drive to a grass parking lot on a one lane road, or the crazy bus ride / parking schemes at places like ST Pete and Long Beach.

60-90 minutes after last night's Texas race some new fan was telling his buddies at the bar back in town all about his first IndyCar race and how he couldn't wait to go again, while convincing them all they should get tickets next year too.

60-90 minutes after many road course / street course races some guy is on his cell phone bitching about the long drive home or the crazy traffic patterns or bus rides.

A big part of "lustification" is the excitement, and a big part of "justification" is how easy it is to go see that excitement.

Auto racing in all forms has always been a world of copycats. Penske comes out with new trick mirrors on their cars, the next week everybody has them. Wings, shocks, driver helmets, and on and on.... "it" is all copied from one to the next, and in the end it comes down to who can execute "it" the best.

The bottom line is that the IRL -- as sad as it may be to us old school USAC / CART / IRL fans -- would be doing itself a huge favor by listening to promoters like Eddie and following closely the path of NASCAR.... Major percentage of ovals on TV / sponsor / advertiser / fan friendly tracks, with a tiny bit of road course / street course action tossed in now and then.

Jimmy

MDS

8th June 2008, 13:52

That same fan, if at an oval, likely isn't bringing his own food and beer. He buys it at the track.

Have you ever been to an oval? Tailgating is a long standing tradition at the NASCAR races I go to. Its why I arrive at the track five hours early or camp out at Talledaga. Every oval I've attended has allowed fans to bring in their own beverages. Even after 9-11 when they had a pointless no hard-sided cooler rule fans still brought beer, often crappy domestic beer, in large clear plastic bags, sold at the speedway, with ice.

I always bring food and beverage to the track whether it is oval, road or street.

I'm going to Nashville for the IRL race next year and I'll be taligating there too. Stop by, I'll have some chicken and burgers on the grill and some beers, good imported stuff, in the cooler.

Yankee Racer

8th June 2008, 14:31

12 oval, 12 road/street/airport sounds reasonable to me. Oval racing may seem better to fans right now, but that's because the IRL isn't at the right road/street/airport courses. I wouldn't mind having more ovals than road/street/airport circuits, though, if the schedule was longer. However, 80% is too much. If you had a 25 race schedule, that would be 20 ovals. I could handle 60%, 15 and 10, but it's all about going to the right ovals and the right road/street/airport circuits. There's a difference between places like Michigan, Texas, Milwaukee, Road America, Mid-Ohio, and Laguna Seca and places like Motegi, Kansas, and Infineon.

Oh, and Ed Carpenter only agrees because he's a **** road course racer. (Nothing against him, he's doing a great job this year).

Albert D. Kallal

8th June 2008, 14:50

I tend to disagree somewhat with the idea that the fans will spend less money because they’ve traveled, or staying there for three days at some permanent tracks as opposed to what fans do at an oval.

Road America is not the best example, because you’re talking about a large spread out natural terrain course.

When you take tracks like Portland international raceway, or even the Cleveland race at the airport, then those venues are not usually spread out, and you usually have the same type of concentration of grandstands, and vendors that you would get an oval.

Furthermore, those fans are spending three days there, not just one day like on an oval. In Edmonton, some of the vendors stuff are nearly sold out the first day by Friday noon, and they still had two days left of sales to go. This is the same experience I had when I went to the Vancouver races for 10 years in a row. There was even a big contingent of Brazil fans, and they would take out a whole huge table in the beer gardens and drink all day until the race or practice sessions were on. they had 3 full days of sales.

From a vendor pointed view, these permanent type tracks, are better than what you would have at an oval because they get a good solid three days of sales.

However, I do agree with your points about signage, TV coverage, ease for the fans to enjoy and understand the racing, and a host of other number of issues. In this regards, I agree that ovals are somewhat better in this regards. Another significant point that you’re not really pressed too hard on is the fact that ovals are simply way less costly to run and maintain, especially when you compare to any temp course. So from a cost point of view, ovals are a better bet.

In fact the biggest downfall of some of these temporary courses like Cleveland or Edmonton is in the high cost of setting up the race for the event. Ovals don’t have this huge cost problem, and therefore once again are generally a more profitable bet to make.

However, it is a question of the fan base. NASCAR shown you can build a fan base from ovals, but unfortunately open wheel racing is not the same kind of racing, and therefore not really all rules apply much the same ( the rules for sponsorship and signage and exposure at ovals up lives to be the same, but how the fans view and see the racing is a different matter altogether). While the oval might be more fan friendly, the problem is you can’t get the fans to go when talking about oval racing.

I guess the question is the three days of fans at these road events worth more then one day at an oval? When you add up the total over those three days, then most of these road/street events actually out draw the ovals by a good amount.

Without question if you can make ovals work, then they’re probably a better way to get fans and keep the industry healthy ( there’s no question is more bang for the buck).

The problem is ovals have had difficulty in getting a good number of fans, and I’m not sure if it’s really the ovals problem, or just the fact that open wheel racing has been weakened so much.

However, I think any event that is well run, promoted well, and it’s *consistently* kept for the same weekend year after year is the way to grow a race. NASCAR’s done that.

Each time a event date is moved, you REALLY mess things up. Moving the Edmonton date again is bad. I think it’s always a mistake to do that.

The long-term races like the Australian race probably gets nearly as many fans as F1, and in fact draws the same numbers as the Indy 500 if you take every day starting from the Tuesday to the Sunday. Cleveland was really successful the last few years also. The same goes for long-term races like Toronto.

So I do agree that the exposure and TV rights and a few other issues do seem to tend to favor ovals a little bit, but on the other hand look at the tv ratings for F1 (so you can have big ratings for great for racing is based on just mostly street and road courses at the end of the day).

The fact matters as some of these long-term events like Toronto introduces more people to racing because it’s right in the city. In my cases I’ve introduced several people into racing very much because of this issue. In fact in the case of Edmonton, I know some people that happen to be traveling in town, and looked at all this excitement, and then decided to go to the race. I can guarantee that if this was some oval track on the outskirts of the city, these people likely would not taken the time to go (in fact that not sure I would've myself taken the time). In many ways these events are more fan friendly because the people don’t have to traveled a long distance to get to those tracks. (and, people are parking thier campers right now due to high fuel costs).

I guess the problem is some of these events have built up a lot of fans over the years, and I think the IRL should simply try to take advantage of these venues that work.

From what I can see that’s exactly what the IRL is doing anyway…

Albert D. Kallal
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
kallal@msn.com

Dr. Krogshöj

8th June 2008, 15:41

Eddie's 80-20 proposal stirred up controversy just like the 1/3-1/3-1/3 proposal did over at TrackForum. It seems only the 50-50 scenario could please bost sides.

MDS

8th June 2008, 16:15

You really should try some domestic microbrews. We have some of the very best beer in the world made right here in the US. Next time you stop by the old watering hole, see what they have on tap other than Bud, Miller or Coors and get awakened to very enjoyable libations. Goes good in the cooler at the track too.

Absolutely, and Atlanta has two great domestic breweries in Atlanta. I'm partial to the Red Brick Blond and Blue Moon Pumpkin special they bring out for the fall.

Chamoo

8th June 2008, 16:36

I'd rather see 40-30-30 split between Ovals, Road Courses, and temporary circuits.

20 race season would include

Ovals
Indy
Milwaukee
Texas
Michigan
Richmond
Chicago
Pheonix
Nazareth

Road Course
Road America
Watkins Glen
Mid-Ohio
Portland
Circuit Gilles Villeneuve or Mont-Tremblant
Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez

Temporary Circuits
Long Beach
Toronto
Edmonton
Cleveland
St. Petersburg
Detroit

Chamoo

8th June 2008, 16:38

I think the main reason Gossage is saying this is because he knows Lanigan would like to have the Houston street race on the '09 IRL calendar, along with Cleveland. Gossage is a smart man when it comes to defending himself. He does good things for the IRL, but this isn't one of them.

If the IRL were to go to Houston and the Texas oval, it could be done without much trouble to either. If they were positioned near either end of the calendar, it wouldn't be a problem.

Jag_Warrior

8th June 2008, 18:01

I'm sure a great many things have changed over the past decade. But I believe Eddie needs to check in with Boss Bruton and get their messages on the same page.

If ovals are the answer, why did Bruton Smith blame the IRL oval races for an SMI earnings shortfall years ago? Why didn't SMI keep the IRL at Charlotte, Atlanta, Las Vegas and the second Texas date? What happened to Pikes Peak, Nazareth and Disney World? Why weren't Phoenix, Gateway and Loudon successful? Why is Michigan and California Speedway not on the schedule?

From what I know, Gossage does a good job of running TMS. But I'm not aware that he has any experience running a racing series. About 20 years ago, GM turned a bunch of fast talkers loose and they began rebadging Chevrolets as Cadillacs. These "brand managers" claimed that if one could sell potato chips, one could sell cars: a product is a product. Make it as cheaply as possible and just change the label on the bag from one brand to another. After these tools had their way, Cadillac was on the verge of disappearing as a viable product line. Lesson learned. AFAIK, all of those people have been fired from GM.

IMO, it wouldn't be a good idea for the IRL to listen to Eddie Gossage, anymore than it would be a good idea for Bernie Ecclestone to listen to Humpy Wheeler. The guy who successfuly sells loads of Timex watches on Ebay might not be THE guy to run a high end shop that sells Rolex's and Cartiers.

indycool

8th June 2008, 20:21

Interesting thread and not the usual "I want" stuff but very thoughtful posts. I think Jimmy Stephans makes some valid points and I think Gossage has SOME validity to his statements.

There are some road and street courses that are ruined for the immediate future and also some ovals. Atlanta, IMO the worst sports town in America, tried USAC Indycars in the '60s, CART Indycars in '79 or so and IRL in the '90s and didn't draw enough to stuff a shotgun with all of 'em combined.

Two other elements are in play here that should be tossed into the thinking pie. CART and CC NEVER drew what they say they did at a great many of those tracks and when ovals with the IRL have announced 30-40,000, that's about the same as the reality of real CART/CC road-course numbers. Surfers and maybe the first couple Mexico City races would certainly be exceptions and Long Beach has been overplayed attendance-wise, just not near as much as some others.

The other is if the split schedule of roads and ovals (I consider street courses road courses because they are) builds or doesn't build. The road racing community has been looking down on the oval-racing community for years. The road racing community and the oval-track community have been fussin' with each other for years. NASCAR has all but two ovals in Sprint Cup. There are 800 short ovals in the U.S. Indy and Daytona are ovals. So, is Gossage wrong that there's a pretty significant oval-track fan base out there, probably larger overall than the road racing fan base? I don't know, but it's worth thinking about.

MDS

8th June 2008, 21:00

Lets say the IRL does keep itself 80 percent oval, how does it market itself? NASCAR without fenders?

It tried that for 12 years and didn't work, no reason to think it will work now.

NickFalzone

8th June 2008, 21:09

It doesn't matter what Gossage says, George and Angstadt have already made public their plans for 50% ovals, this will be even more clear when they release next season's schedule in a few weeks. TMS will always be on the schedule because its always had great racing. Not sure what Gossage is so upset about as far as his business. And Tony now has what he always wanted, control of the "Indy" series. It's CART with the 500 as its focal point. TG and family were worried the 500 was getting diminished by CART, now it's back to being secure. The beauty of Indy cars is that they produce great racing on both ovals and road/street, it's this mix that makes the series exciting. And Tony George is well aware of that. An all-oval IndyCar series would not interest me. On the trackside radio show a couple months ago Tony even said he would be open to 1/3 oval, 1/3 street, 1/3 road courses. Again, as long as Indy is the center point of the series, George and family will be satisfied.

indycool

8th June 2008, 22:59

Gossage got the issue -- and his race -- in the paper, and that's what he intended to do, IMO.

The Indy cars have always sold speed. With the ovals, it still can have that in its arsenal. But things evolve. NASCAR started slowing cars down after Bill Elliott hit 212 at Talladega and concentrated on competition. The Indy cars did that rearding speed 30 years ago, and as technology brought speeds back up, rules were changed to slow them back down. We're not going to see Luyendyk's 239 at Indy again, or de Ferran's 240 at Fontana.

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 01:33

I still think it is amazing. For years I was told that CART, then the CCWS had the right business plan and the IRL and George were nitwits and would fail.

Now with one gone, everyone wants to embrace what caused the other series to fail as the new plan.

The IRL will die and there will be no picking up the pieces if a 1/3 formula is used and could die a slow twitching death at 50%.

Like I have said, if I was running things I would have turned my back and walked away. Reason? Because you cannot satisfy the so called fan base unless Tony George is gone, all the races are dumped, including Indy, DP01 and Cosworth Power and 24 races of which 24 will lose money because that doesn't matter.

Or have I read something wrong here.

Oh yes, Nazareth is gone!

MDS

9th June 2008, 02:42

The IRL will die and there will be no picking up the pieces if a 1/3 formula is used and could die a slow twitching death at 50%.

If the IRL vision worked, ratings should be skyrocketing this year. Unification happened, Danica won, Graham Rahal won, Marco consistantly provides spectacluar wrecks, and yet ratings are down across the board. Texas, the supposed second marquee event, was tape delayed an hour and pushed back for post race coverage of a feeder series, a feeder series that constantly doubles non Indy 500 races in ratings and draws fatter crowds to the ovals IRL fans supposedly love and turn out for in droves.

Media hype and attention are at unseen levels and ratings for every race is ethier holding somewhat close to last year or falling dramatically. The first unified Indy 500 in 12 years drew less than half of the ratings of the last unified Indy 500, and now, ranks below an average NASCAR race.

You do have one thing right, Tony George needs to go, the faster the better. If the house that Tony built worked all of the increased attention should have brought, well increased attention, and short of a larger, yet far less than a sellout, Indy 500 attendance, little has changed. If anything less people are interested than they were last year.

ShiftingGears

9th June 2008, 03:25

Randy_L

9th June 2008, 05:46

It isn’t hard to figure out guys like Eddie Gossage. He’s a salesman and he is simply, and rather transparently, trying to bolster and promote his own interests. He owns a high banked oval, and as such he seeks to cater to that narrower base of fans. As long as his race track is thriving it’s of no interest to him what the broader fan base, or indeed the drivers and car owners want. Tony George is talking about balancing out the schedule in future years because he knows from experience that this will help to broaden appeal, and will lead to a much better series, regardless of what the trend is in Texas. 10 years of conflict have to teach you something.

MAX_THRUST

9th June 2008, 12:04

another track owner who thinks he knows how to run a series..........thought we'd been down this road before haven't we? Let him start his wn all oval series...........whats the point of making mistakes if no one learnt anything.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 16:02

The IRL will die and there will be no picking up the pieces if a 1/3 formula is used and could die a slow twitching death at 50%.

It was dying a slow twitching death at 100% ovals!!

The CART formula was hugely successful BEFORE greed took over and killed the series. The IRL (also founded on greed) formula has NEVER been successful. If it was, then there would have been no need to merge.

NASCAR is successful on ovals, not because of the ovals. But because of the 'banging is racing' that takes place on the ovals. Take a look at it's legendary hero, the Intimidator. How exactly did he earn that name?

CART sent drivers to F1 (and vice versa) when it was a diverse mix of driving skills because the drivers were prepared (and there was also money). The IRL sent/sends drivers to NASCAR because NASCAR's money is better.

This series needs to be a world class series in order to attract money and drivers. And that means it needs road/street races to not only survive, but to grow.

And since prowrestling already has it's motorsports division. We need to be more like olympians.

indycool

9th June 2008, 16:14

Calm down, Rex. The IRL had five races in 1996 and grew to many more with the track building boom and went to new markets where CART wasn't and has built solid programs in partnership with places like Texas, Kentucky, Kansas, Richmond, Chicagoland and others.

And you have things a wee bit turned around. No, the IRL didn't hafta "merge." And it didn't. It offered an acceptable bailout to The Amigos, one of which (KK) who was bailing anyway, a quite generous bailout to allow a good portion of the CC race teams to remain "whole." And now we're back to one series with a strong car count, which almost everyone has said they've wanted for years.

If the CART formula was "hugely successful," why did CART go bankrupt?

And there are 800 short ovals in the U.S. IMO, there are plenty of NASCAR fans in the stands at IRL oval events -- sit in the stands sometime and look at the gear they're wearing -- and plenty of IRL fans at NASCAR events.

For at least 40 years, this has been about road racers and oval racers fussin' and feudin' over which is better. That ain't gonna change. Expect more of it.

NickFalzone

9th June 2008, 17:15

CART went bankrupt because of the IRL. Champ Car went bankrupt because of the IRL (and perhaps bad management).

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 17:32

If the IRL vision worked, ratings should be skyrocketing this year. Unification happened, Danica won, Graham Rahal won, Marco consistantly provides spectacluar wrecks, and yet ratings are down across the board.

What is the love of the ratings. I am more concerned with people in the stands. Look ESPN pays around $40,000,000. Do you think they are unhappy when the pay twice as much for the NNS and gets a little better.

Texas, the supposed second marquee event, was tape delayed an hour and pushed back for post race coverage of a feeder series, a feeder series that constantly doubles non Indy 500 races in ratings and draws fatter crowds to the ovals IRL fans supposedly love and turn out for in droves.

Did you see the crowd at Nashville? IRL will do much better.

Media hype and attention are at unseen levels and ratings for every race is ethier holding somewhat close to last year or falling dramatically. The first unified Indy 500 in 12 years drew less than half of the ratings of the last unified Indy 500, and now, ranks below an average NASCAR race.

Yes and there were 50 Channels. Look at the drop from 1985 Tape to 1986 live. NASCAR moved to a prime time race, the 500 isn't.

You do have one thing right, Tony George needs to go, the faster the better. If the house that Tony built worked all of the increased attention should have brought, well increased attention, and short of a larger, yet far less than a sellout, Indy 500 attendance, little has changed. If anything less people are interested than they were last year.

I agree, we need to adopt all thing CCWS because they did so well getting ratings, selling out the stands, getting sponsorship and making their stars household names.

As long as Indy is on the schedule then Tony George will be there so my suggestion is move to a different form of motorsports as this is what it is.

garyshell

9th June 2008, 17:32

I have one simple question, what racing series has Gossage ever run?

Enough said.

Gary

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 17:34

CART went bankrupt because of the IRL. Champ Car went bankrupt because of the IRL (and perhaps bad management).

Really? What proof do you have of that? The IPO raised over $100,000,000 and they went through it in a year. How did the IRL do that?

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 17:36

It was dying a slow twitching death at 100% ovals!!

Really, who survived?

Everytime a full Road Course Open Wheel Series has been tried in the U.S. it died.

Why? No interest.

AntiSpeed

9th June 2008, 18:28

The CART formula was hugely successful BEFORE

NASCAR is successful on ovals, not because of the ovals.

Agreed. Anyone who thinks CART/Champ Car failed because they had road and street courses is ignoring how insanely successful CART was pre-split. I think it shows that casual fans really don't care if it's on an oval or a street course or a road course. If it's popular, people will watch it, regardless of the type of track.

As far as on-track product, CART had a formula that worked. The sooner the IRL gets back to that formula the better, IMHO. Once they get that the only thing the IRL needs to do better is to market it.

Really, who survived?

The IRL didn't survive because of any superior business model. George won simply because he had more money to spend. I can't back it up but I heard somewhere that the IRL lost $300million in the first 10 years :eek: . Try raising capital for a business that expects to lose that much in its first 10 years!

indycool

9th June 2008, 18:39

Anti-, same thing to you I said to Rex. Add to it this:

How much of it was CART and how much of it was PPG holding the series together, spending money with CART, spending money with the promoters and making it a solid racing series?

Attendance at most races so far this year has been up, some significantly so. No, the ratings haven't been.

TG won because he spent more money? CART was "insanely successful?" CART had an IPO that brought in $100 million and it still went bankrupt. That's successful? And CC was a good idea? Get real.

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 18:48

The IRL didn't survive because of any superior business model. George won simply because he had more money to spend. I can't back it up but I heard somewhere that the IRL lost $300million in the first 10 years :eek: . Try raising capital for a business that expects to lose that much in its first 10 years!

Really? That came from CART sites and never was proven except that if CART lost money then the IRL lost more. During the first 5 years of the IRL the Budget was $30,000,000 so with no revenue at all, the IRL lost $150,000,000. The 500 paid that. For the last 5 years the budget has averaged $46,000,000 including the 500. So do you think with TV, sponsors and no Bernie's circus that the IRL loses money.

Reality is the IRL has made money but in the $10,000,000 range. CART/CCWS never made more than over the 25 years.

AntiSpeed

9th June 2008, 19:01

And you have things a wee bit turned around. No, the IRL didn't hafta "merge." And it didn't. It offered an acceptable bailout to The Amigos, one of which (KK) who was bailing anyway, a quite generous bailout to allow a good portion of the CC race teams to remain "whole." And now we're back to one series with a strong car count, which almost everyone has said they've wanted for years.

Agreed.

If the CART formula was "hugely successful," why did CART go bankrupt?

CART went bankrupt because they lost the 500 and the IRL entered a market where there simply isn't enough room for two. If any sport were divided the way open wheel racing was, it would fail. Football realized this in the 60's when the NFL and AFL merged. Imagine if the NFL split into two different leagues, one taking the Super Bowl and the other taking most of the NFL's established names and markets.

For at least 40 years, this has been about road racers and oval racers fussin' and feudin' over which is better. That ain't gonna change. Expect more of it.

But isn't that what makes being an IndyCar fan so much more fun? :bounce:

How much of it was CART and how much of it was PPG holding the series together, spending money with CART, spending money with the promoters and making it a solid racing series?

I can't really comment on that since I was in middle school in the early 90's. But I do know that CART had very well attended events, big TV numbers, well known drivers, Fortune 500 sponsors and was rivaling F1 for world-wide popularity.

Attendance at most races so far this year has been up, some significantly so. No, the ratings haven't been

Agreed. An encouraging sign. Remember though that Champ Car had impressive attendance (maybe they inflated the official numbers a little, but you can't dispute that the street races had a lot of people there), but couldn't convert that into TV numbers. And TV numbers is where the big money comes in, so that should be a very important goal for the IRL.

TG won because he spent more money? CART was "insanely successful?" CART had an IPO that brought in $100 million and it still went bankrupt. That's successful?

CART was hugely successful, for the reasons I listed above. If they weren't profitable, it was because of poor management, not because it wasn't popular. When did CART go public? I assume it was well after the split? I won't argue that after 1996 CART was in a drastic decline, but you can't argue that before that it was incredibly popular (there, I'll use that word instead of successful, better?)

And CC was a good idea?

I didn't say a single thing about Champ Car.

AntiSpeed

9th June 2008, 20:26

I didn't say a single thing about Champ Car.

I reviewed my post and of course I did mention Champ Car. However, there is a clear distinction between saying they had some strong crowds and saying Champ Car on the whole was a good idea. I enjoyed the product but I spent those four years banging my head off any wall I could find over CC's lack of business sense. You're putting words in my mouth.

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 20:30

CART went bankrupt because they lost the 500 and the IRL entered a market where there simply isn't enough room for two.

Really, even after a successful IPO that raised loads of money. They never had the 500, so how could the lose something they never had. The 500 and IMS never paid CART a dime. The 500 cost the Teams 60% of their budgets just to do a United States Auto Club race. Interestingly the same cars were legal in 1995 and in 1996 and the United States Auto Club sanctioned the race yet it was considered a lock out by those wanting to rewrite the history.
Two series worked well from 1996-2003 when Pook shot his wad of money. 2004-2007 when it became apparent the losses would continue.

The war is over and that is it. Making excuses for what happen are a waste of time.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 20:34

Really, who survived?

Who survives heart transplant surgery?

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 20:36

Everytime a full Road Course Open Wheel Series has been tried in the U.S. it died.

Why? No interest.

Exactly who is advocating a full road course OWS? I am opposing your full oval coarse OWS.

Why? No interest.

F1boat

9th June 2008, 20:37

I think that what makes Indy Car distinct are ovals. 80-20 is too big, but 60-40 is OK.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 20:47

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 20:48

Why? No interest.

On your part but the crowd at TMS made little Eddie about $2,500,000. When did a Road Course race do that for CCWS or CART before that?

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 20:55

TG won because he spent more money?

Well it certainly wasn't because of great management skills or being the most popular series in the market place.

CART was "insanely successful?"

Then why did TG want a part of it?

CART had an IPO that brought in $100 million and it still went bankrupt. That's successful?

How else would you explain the ability of CART to raise $100 million in an IPO? People saw the value in the series.

And CC was a good idea? Get real.

And IRL was a good idea? Get real.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 20:57

On your part but the crowd at TMS made little Eddie about $2,500,000. When did a Road Course race do that for CCWS or CART before that?

The Long Beach Grand Prix is largely responsible for reviving an entire city. That cost much more than 2.5 million dollars.

AntiSpeed

9th June 2008, 20:58

Really, even after a successful IPO that raised loads of money. They never had the 500, so how could the lose something they never had. The 500 and IMS never paid CART a dime.

The Indy 500 was a CART race. It was part of the CART schedule, hence they had the Indy 500. They didn't make any profits from the event itself, but it was an important sponsorship draw and losing it hurt CART significantly.

Two series worked well from 1996-2003 when Pook shot his wad of money. 2004-2007 when it became apparent the losses would continue.

Really? Isn't that when attendance dropped, sponsors fled, ratings fell? It took some time, sure, but you can't argue that CART circa 1996-2003 was nearly as strong as CART circa 1990-1995.

The war is over and that is it. Making excuses for what happen are a waste of time.

Hey, you brought it up.

indycool

9th June 2008, 21:02

xtlm

9th June 2008, 21:04

50 - 50

going past this may be bad in my view

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 21:07

The Indy 500 was a CART race. It was part of the CART schedule, hence they had the Indy 500. They didn't make any profits from the event itself, but it was an important sponsorship draw and losing it hurt CART significantly.

For years it wasn't on the CART Schedule. No money, no sanction and when given the chance to sanction it in December of 1991, they elected not to bring it to a vote. Thus they didn't care enough for the 500 to get paid a sanction fee! There is the start of the IRL.

Really? Isn't that when attendance dropped, sponsors fled, ratings fell? It took some time, sure, but you can't argue that CART circa 1996-2003 was nearly as strong as CART circa 1990-1995.

They were stronger from 1996-2003. History proves that but the shows started getting too expensive for a $515,000 purse.

Hey, you brought it up.

You want to rewrite the actual history, not I.

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 21:09

The Long Beach Grand Prix is largely responsible for reviving an entire city. That cost much more than 2.5 million dollars.

For the Promoter not for a city, county or state. So the question remains.

indycool

9th June 2008, 21:12

Rex, the IRL didn't need heart surgery to survive. CC was already dead. KK had quit throwing money down a dry hole. Basically, TG's offer saved some race teams. That's about it.

TG wanted no part of CART. He was offered it in a buyout in August of 2003 by Bear, Stearns, which was engaged by CART to sell it, and he turned it down.

People saw value in the series in the IPO? After the split? Guess people saw value in Enron, too, and they all lost their cabooses.

Unless an extraordinary financial package is together and sound for the long term, those paved roads leading to the fairgrounds should be used for regular traffic.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 21:36

For the Promoter not for a city, county or state. So the question remains.

The question was answered. You didn't like that the answer didn't support your initial position, so now you have more narrowly defined your question.

That said, 2.5 million over a 12 year period doesn't really sound that astonishing to me. Are you sure there are no road racing/street tracks that bring 210,000 per year?

I'd like to see the link for this before we move forward.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 21:49

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 22:10

Rex, the IRL didn't need heart surgery to survive. CC was already dead.

The heart donor always dies, in order for the recipient of the heart to live.

indycool

9th June 2008, 22:13

Rex, there are two questions for your answer on 210,000 fans to a street race, in the context of whether a city that supports it gets its gains economically within the community (soft gains) or not:

1. Do, in fact, street races bring 210,000 fans? I believe the answer to that is MAYBE Surfers....even if it's 70,000 fans each day of one of the infamous three-day totals. If anyone thinks a race, scrunched up into a small area of a city's downtown with limited viewing places, draws three times what an NFL game does in a stadium, they're dreaming.

2. Do, in fact, street races bring 210,000 fans from OUT OF TOWN? The answer is no. That is a Chris Pook-Bernie Ecclestone launched selling facade from years ago. In any area, including the Indianapolis 500, the overwhelming majority of fans come from driving distance. Yes, for ovals or street races, hotels fill up in the immediate area. At Michigan, they fill up in Jackson and Ann Arbor. Okay, how many rooms is that? And how many of them are used by the teams? ("Champagne Bob" McCabe, the father of the F1 Detroit GP, bought into Bernie's act and actually advertised in Guatemala City, of all things. How many tickets do you think he sold there?).

3. Your analogy of a heart donor is well off-target. The IRL has lasted 12 years and is going forward in a different landscape than it's ever been in, a cleaner one. CART lasted eight years after the split and went belly-up. CC lasted four years after that and went belly-up. They didn't do that on purpose to be "donors."

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 22:16

TG wanted no part of CART.

Really? Then why did he form the IRL after being scorned by CART?

As in most wars, nobody won. CART's management was wrong and so was TG. And the sport suffered greatly from both sides of the war.

The patient is now of out of intensive care, and it might even live. But there is no guaruntee.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 22:19

Rex, there are two questions for your answer on 210,000 fans to a street race...

The 210,000 figure was for dollars, not for attendence.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 22:23

The IRL has lasted 12 years and is going forward in a different landscape than it's ever been in, a cleaner one.

Patients can last a long time on life support, especially if Honda is footing the bill.

That this patient finally took the long prescribed remedy for their survival, is evident to all but the most partisan.

indycool

9th June 2008, 22:32

--Guess he formed the IRL after being scorned by CART because of exactly what I said -- he wanted no part of dealing with CART.

--Yes, I presume there are races of all kinds that make $210,000 or more. The Las Vegas street race lost between $15m and $19m, depending on who you're talking to. There are those which didn't, too.

--A successful racing series is going to hafta have many successful parts. Honda, a manufacturer, is one of them. NASCAR and F1 have manufacturers. A strong series sponsor, like PPG was, would be another. Creative and financially sound promoters with good facilities who can generate fans to come to the races. Car owners who are financially sound and driv ers who can put on a show the fans like. Sponsors who can get exposure value out of it the way they want. If any of those elements are out of whack, it can affect other elements,

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 22:57

--A successful racing series is going to hafta have many successful parts. Honda, a manufacturer, is one of them. NASCAR and F1 have manufacturers. A strong series sponsor, like PPG was, would be another. Creative and financially sound promoters with good facilities who can generate fans to come to the races. Car owners who are financially sound and driv ers who can put on a show the fans like. Sponsors who can get exposure value out of it the way they want. If any of those elements are out of whack, it can affect other elements,

Add to that an officiating body that is able to develop a sound set of rules and maintain their stability so as to attract more manufacturers, and I'd agree wholeheartedly.

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 23:03

The question was answered. You didn't like that the answer didn't support your initial position, so now you have more narrowly defined your question.

Are they paying the bills of the show? No, some person or persons is. You guys take the attitude that losing money is not important, well it is. LBGP lost money for the last couple of years. $4,000,000 from the IRL helped make it profitable.

That said, 2.5 million over a 12 year period doesn't really sound that astonishing to me.

Where is that? Eddie made at least that much the other night. The IRL made around $10,000,000 over the last 12 years. CART/CCWS lost $300,000,000 plus.

Are you sure there are no road racing/street tracks that bring 210,000 per year?

I'd like to see the link for this before we move forward.

Edmonton did and lost money, Mexico City did and lost money, Toronto did and lost money.
$15,000,000 divided by 210,000 is how much and the fact that Friday's were free.
In 2006 the Indy 500 lost money with 275,000 race day tickets, you know why?
They had to pay off the balance on the roadcourse. Accounting loss, not a real loss like the shows above.
http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127405

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 23:06

The IRL made around $10,000,000 over the last 12 years.

Link please, as it is widely believed that TG spent much more money than this to keep the IRL afloat.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 23:10

Eddie made at least that much the other night.

I'd also like to see the link where TMS made 2.5 million profit in one night.

You seem to think that money falls from freely from IRL heaven and that there is no expense involved in running a show.

indycool

9th June 2008, 23:14

Link to your "widely believed" and the credibility of the link, since The Hulman Co. is private and only the accountants and the IRS know.

Why WALDO might make that statement about $2.5m, and I have no idea if it is true or false, he well MIGHT be either reading or interpreting the quarterly reports of SMI, a public company which owns Texas. Attendance, suites, signage, hospitality, souvenir sales, sponsorship, concessions, etc.....a lot goes into it.

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 23:20

!!WALDO!!

9th June 2008, 23:24

I'd also like to see the link where TMS made 2.5 million profit in one night.

You seem to think that money falls from freely from IRL heaven and that there is no expense involved in running a show.

The show is covered by sponsors and is only $500,000. The same deal that CART used from 1988-1998 and the IRL used from 1996-2008. TV, Sponsors, Suppliers, Event Sponsorship and misc leaves a small cost.

TMS is making $4,500,000 times two just off the NASCAR TV DEAL with a paid purse and no ticket sales.

Not a dream but reality. You guys want the IRL to drop NASCAR tracks that make the nut for the year in favor of $15,000,000 shows.

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 23:31

TMS is making $4,500,000 times two just off the NASCAR TV DEAL with a paid purse and no ticket sales.

So NASCAR subsidized the IRL experiment?

Rex Monaco

9th June 2008, 23:33

You guys want the IRL to drop NASCAR tracks that make the nut for the year in favor of $15,000,000 shows.

And you don't because ticket sales for NASCAR races makes the IRL races possible? How is that a measure of a healthy series?

indycool

9th June 2008, 23:41

My post about "widely believed" was directed at Rex's post, not yours Waldo.

The answer is "no" to your question about NASCAR subsidizing IRL races. They're different deals altogether and NASCAR races most probably make more money than IRL races, but that's not to say that the IRL races do not contribute to the bottom line of a race track.

A permanent oval needs to maximize its use over 365 days a year -- events make the most, but there are driver's schools, outings, etc. For example, Lowe's in Charlotte has a contract with Douglas Airport to bring out their jet driers to keep runways clear in case of snow emergencies. A temp course has only three days to do it and on the race alone.

MDS

10th June 2008, 00:10

What is the love of the ratings. I am more concerned with people in the stands. Look ESPN pays around $40,000,000. Do you think they are unhappy when the pay twice as much for the NNS and gets a little better.

Ratings is what allows sports to get TV deals, which allows people to watch on TV, if they can't/don't watch every race on TV the majority won't show up. Even at Indy the people in the stands make up a fraction of the people who are watching at home. The only exception to this might be Texas, because once the ratings come out, where about a third of total viewers will be at the track.

Did you see the crowd at Nashville? IRL will do much better.

Only because the race is subsidized by Firestone gives out $20 tickets to thousands of employees and their families.

The IRL fan will attend an oval race when its free or cheap: Homestead is filled with tens of thousands of Malboro give aways. Chicago and Kansas are packed as a result of season ticket bundles with NASCAR. The only two races that do well is Texas and Iowa, the rest of the ovals struggle to get people in the door.

The top five attended events this year will be: Surfer's Paradise, Indy, Long Beach, Edmonton, Texas, Chicago.

Yes, before the split, the PPG Indy Car World Series was growing in popularity. How much of that was PPG, how much was CART and how much was the Indianapolis 500 and how much of that can be attributed to something else, I'm sure we can have an absolutely wild argument about.

No one can know what factors caused CART to grow, but we all know one man caused the AOWR to shirnk, that alone should disqualify him from having sole control of only major open wheel racing series in America.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 00:27

So NASCAR subsidized the IRL experiment?

No, just tracks and all activities benefit from it. Plain and simple. Read this history of the sport, tracks have failed. Not one with a Cup date has.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 00:30

Only because the race is subsidized by Firestone gives out $20 tickets to thousands of employees and their families..

Really, that helps pay the bills. Notice that didn't exist in the CCWS and where are they now.

No one can know what factors caused CART to grow, but we all know one man caused the AOWR to shirnk, that alone should disqualify him from having sole control of only major open wheel racing series in America.

They were considered Indy Cars, then CART did not want to run Indy any more. It was actually 24 men, RP knew the whole deal was folly.

indycool

10th June 2008, 00:43

MDS, no we ALL don't know.

AntiSpeed

10th June 2008, 01:13

Anti- , judging from your breakdown of my post, we're a lot closer to agreement than I thought. A few things:

1. CART, as a sanctioning body, was as Waldo says, NEVER had the "500." Its teams were always invited. Even in the year of the split, 1996, two predominantly CART teams (Walker and Galles) still ran Indy. The rest declined until Ganassi and Penske did one-offs, then moved, and Newman-Haas did a one-off, then stayed with CAT.

I disagree for reasons I have stated before. You can nitpick all you want, but for all intents and purposes, it was a CART race. But that's beside the point I was trying to make. My original point was that after the Indy 500 was taken off CART's schedule (for whatever reason you want to believe, that's also beside my point), it was a serious blow to CART.

2. After 40 years of it, I've never really enjoyed road racing people condescendingly talking down to oval racing people telling them their form of the sport required more talent, was better, was a truer test of this and that, etc. The arguments have been worse than snobbery and I have hated them because I feel they're FOS and they'd be FOS the other direction, too.

I raced at Milwaukee in 2006 with Star Mazda, and it really was an eye-opener. While turning left all day gets somewhat repetitive, it's no less of a challenge than road racing, albeit a significantly different one.
Where I have a problem is with the stomp-and-steer ovals. Homestead, TMS, and wherever else the drivers are flat out all the way around, and the only thing they can do is trim the cars out as much as possible and try not to scrub any speed. IMHO they may as well have a race at a Six Flags gokart track. This is why I am so anxious for the IRL review the aero specs for the new car. IMHO they either need to decrease drag or decrease downforce, whatever they can to give the driver the possibility of exceeding the limits of traction. While I do prefer road and street courses (it fits better into my ideology behind auto racing, which I could explain if you like in another thread), it's not so much the ovals I have a problem with anymore (although for the record, I was never against a diverse schedule), as much as the mindlessness of pasting the accelerator to the floor and just steering the car around the track.

3. If you were in middle school at the time, you might not have known that CART's TV numbers were a bit larger but NOT overpowering, its attendance announced was inflated and about what it is now at most places, its drivers at the time of the split were possibly just a bit better known than showed up for IRL and there's no trophy for competing with F1 for world supremacy theories.

I'll have to take your word for it, I suppose, but with everyone in the industry harping back to the 'heyday' and the 'golden era' of pre-split CART, I suspect things were somewhat rosier than the picture you paint. And there is no trophy for competing with F1, but it would be something worth noting. After all, isn't having IndyCar as the biggest sport in the western hemisphere, if not the world, what we all want?

4. The street races did NOT have the attendance some attribute to it in rewriting history. Cleveland's a big race, right? They never built more than 25,000 seats at Cleveland with NO GAs. The most I've heard of for a temporary circuit was 44,000 seats at Long Beach during its heyday. Most were 20-25,000. Really, no more than any other race.

Eye-ball judging and comparing full-to-empty seats based on pictures on the internet and from TV broadcasts is even less reliable than published attendance reports. I was at most of the Champ Car street races last year and I won't throw out numbers, but I can say that there was a buzz that if Champ Car could have converted it to TV numbers, they would likely still be around. That brings me back to my original point. IRL attendance looks to be up. That's great. But the real money comes when you get big TV numbers. The IRL should be weary of what happened to Champ Car and needs to be aggressively working towards converting new attendees into new TV viewers, and keeping them.

6. Yes, before the split, the PPG Indy Car World Series was growing in popularity. How much of that was PPG, how much was CART and how much was the Indianapolis 500 and how much of that can be attributed to something else, I'm sure we can have an absolutely wild argument about.

How great would it be if the IRL had a sponsor that cared as much as PPG?

indycool

10th June 2008, 01:31

Ohhhhh-KAY.....we even got a bit closer on this one:

1. Indy was NOT a CART race. Eventually, it became a PPG Indy Car World Series race when PPG brokered a deal. But Indy and USAC did NOT even have the same rules, which allowed the Buicks more boost pressure than CART did, and why the Buicks were uncompetitive in CART and didn't bother to run CART races.

2. Understand your point of view, I find your personal comments about ovals much more reasonable than that of most who favor road races and that's refreshing.

3. "Everyone in the industry" doesn't harp about the "heyday" of pre-split CART. No question the series was better as one series, though. And, IMO, it'll be better as one series again. And who's to judge, on what basis that the world has agreed on, whether it's better than F1 or not? Personally, I like it better than F1 and have always liked it better than F1. I imagine there are plenty of people in different countries who disagree. That's why I term it a "mythical trophy."

4. CC was hyping and overstating attendance numbers because it was selling cities on street events by saying they'd bring 150,000 people. Street events just CAN'T physically draw the kind of numbers that were portrayed. I know someone who counted the seats at Denver its last year -- 22,000, including suites, and the seating wasn't full on Race Day. San Jose had VERY few places to watch from. Cleveland slowly cut back the number of stands built as sales went down and may well have been under 20,000 last year. On TV numbers, agreed. TV is a revenue source and a key to popularity growth.

6. It would be SUPER great!

Rex Monaco

10th June 2008, 01:37

Not one with a Cup date has.

Are we talking about Winston Cup? Because I can name a few tracks that failed even though they had Winston Cup races.

And what you are also saying is that the Indianapolis Motor Speedway would have failed with the Indy 500 alone and it needed NASCAR (now it's biggest race) to help it survive.

So doesn't that also point to the huge hit that AOWR took when the IRL split the AOWR community?

indycool

10th June 2008, 03:11

Rockingham and N. Wilkesboro failed for various reasons, the biggest part being the glut of races down south and expansion to bigger new facilities with bigger draws and bigger sanctioning fees. Their dates were "cannibalized." Darlington's Southern 500 went as a second race to Fontana. We might see more of this as ISC and SMI buy up tracks.

The answer to your question, Rex, is no. And the Allstate 400 at the Brickyard is NOT the biggest race at Indy and CANNOT be by attendance, because no GAs are sold for the Allstate 400 at the Brickyard.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 03:47

Are we talking about Winston Cup? Because I can name a few tracks that failed even though they had Winston Cup races.

So those tracks have been plowed under?

And what you are also saying is that the Indianapolis Motor Speedway would have failed with the Indy 500 alone and it needed NASCAR (now it's biggest race) to help it survive.

No it helped pay for the $30,000,000 F-1 deal.

So doesn't that also point to the huge hit that AOWR took when the IRL split the AOWR community?

600,000 fans then and 600,000 today.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 03:50

How great would it be if the IRL had a sponsor that cared as much as PPG?

Did you read the CART Simon White Paper of 1993? CART wanted to see what was the cancer eating and commissioned Dick and Diane Simon to look at things.

PPG paid $8,000,000 which $5,000,000 was for the Pace Car Program and $3,000,000 for points.

Came right from the CART Books. There is caring. When the BY was announced the jumped ship.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 04:09

Link please, as it is widely believed that TG spent much more money than this to keep the IRL afloat.

See dozen years ago 3 of us who knew the truth decided they were sick and tired of the hatred being directed at us. So since we knew the truth then we could easily twist things so the CART fanatics would believe it. We joined CART sites and spewed stuff including that TG spent the Hulman Fortune to keep the IRL alive.
Simple in 1997, CART lost $3,000,000. So we put out a number of $300,000,000 to keep a series worth $30,000,000 alive. It was interesting that we found that for some it was easy to accept things as fact if they wanted to believe it rather than going and reading a NSSN of that day to find the IRL was spending $30,000,000 and about $3,000,000 wasn't covered. So the split cost $6,000,000. The CART fans accepted $300,000,000 but would not accept any CART losses.
On these boards we made over 15,000 posts and then go back to the Indy Star and get beaten up by our own spew. We laughed and did it through the end of 2007.
It was like fishing. For an IRL fan to bite you needed to bait the hook real well. (How does he know something I do not?) They could toss the hook.
The CART Fans just throw a hook in the water and you caught at least 10. (I read it here on a PRO CART BOARD so it has to be true)
Some of our stuff ended up on AR1 as FACT.

See we found the average CART fan read nothing about the series other than what was spoon fed to them. The IRL fan wasn't much more hungry for knowledge so it left the fans clueless to the truth.

Truth is easy to find. The other day, I was reading the 2008 500 Program. Many things that tell you how this series is paid for is in there if you are willing to reading and use a calculator and a piece of paper.

If you don't then you will say; as it is widely believed that TG spent much more money than this to keep the IRL afloat. My best work from May of 1998.

AntiSpeed

10th June 2008, 04:15

Did you read the CART Simon White Paper of 1993? I haven't, but I would LOVE to if you could point me in the right direction...

PPG paid $8,000,000 which $5,000,000 was for the Pace Car Program and $3,000,000 for points.

Came right from the CART Books. There is caring. When the BY was announced the jumped ship.

I based my comment on what indycool had said, as he suggested that CART was basically being kept afloat by PPG. I really don't know the details about it, and I'm curious to where your intimate knowledge of CART's finances comes from (again, if you could point me in the right direction, I would love nothing more than to peruse them myself). If you and indycool want to have a debate on PPG's CART sponsorship levels then be my guest...

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 04:27

I haven't, but I would LOVE to if you could point me in the right direction...

I based my comment on what indycool had said, as he suggested that CART was basically being kept afloat by PPG. I really don't know the details about it, and I'm curious to where your intimate knowledge of CART's finances comes from (again, if you could point me in the right direction, I would love nothing more than to peruse them myself). If you and indycool want to have a debate on PPG's CART sponsorship levels then be my guest...

$250,000 per car from each owner gave you 2 votes maximum. Three cars still $250,000 per car, two votes and $25,000 per car per race maximum of two cars.

So the car owners funded CART for years.

AntiSpeed

10th June 2008, 04:31

$250,000 per car from each owner gave you 2 votes maximum. Three cars still $250,000 per car, two votes and $25,000 per car per race maximum of two cars.

So the car owners funded CART for years.

Huh?

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 04:36

Huh?

What don't you understand? From 1979 through 1997 it was the way you got voting rights and your race stipend.

If you were a member, you finished last you got $25,000. If not you got ZERO.
If you won as a member you got $60,000 plus $25,000 and if not $60,000.

15 races paid you $375,000 per car. Indy you got what you won. One of the reasons Simon Racing and Paragon Racing were split off. Simon got $375,000 x2 x2.

AntiSpeed

10th June 2008, 04:48

What don't you understand? From 1979 through 1997 it was the way you got voting rights and your race stipend.

If you were a member, you finished last you got $25,000. If not you got ZERO.
If you won as a member you got $60,000 plus $25,000 and if not $60,000.

15 races paid you $375,000 per car. Indy you got what you won. One of the reasons Simon Racing and Paragon Racing were split off. Simon got $375,000 x2 x2.

That's swell, but you really didn't answer any of my questions?

garyshell

10th June 2008, 04:48

Really, even after a successful IPO that raised loads of money. They never had the 500, so how could the lose something they never had. The 500 and IMS never paid CART a dime. The 500 cost the Teams 60% of their budgets just to do a United States Auto Club race.

A difference without a distinction. Certainly USAC was the Indy 500 sanctioning body, without a doubt. But so what, to the fans, sponsors and teams the Indy 500 was part of the same schedule of events as the rest of the CART sanctioned season.

Interestingly the same cars were legal in 1995 and in 1996 and the United States Auto Club sanctioned the race yet it was considered a lock out by those wanting to rewrite the history.

Oh please, explain to me how the 28-5 rule was not a lockout. And spare me the garbage about all the teams had to do was commit to two (or was it three) other races. That was a sham and we both know it.

Two series worked well from 1996-2003 when Pook shot his wad of money. 2004-2007 when it became apparent the losses would continue.

What a stinking load of malarkey. It did not work well for either series. Many of us saw the handwriting on the wall immediately. There was no way it would EVER work. It was no more than a high stakes game of chicken. It was just like the example stated earlier, if you split the NFL into two leagues one with the superbowl and the other with the major markets would they both survive?

The war is over and that is it. Making excuses for what happen are a waste of time.
And yet, you continue to do exactly that.

Gary

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 04:51

That's swell, but you really didn't answer any of my questions?

Huh? Ask one I do not have my mind reading brain installed.

garyshell

10th June 2008, 04:58

On your part but the crowd at TMS made little Eddie about $2,500,000. When did a Road Course race do that for CCWS or CART before that?

That assumes that the ONLY value to the series is the dollars that come through the gate. That money is only important to Eddie, not the series.

Certainly you are not going to get that sort of gate numbers at a road course. I will accept that as fact. But the value of road and street courses to the series is the cache given the drivers that can excel in a variety of disciplines. There is much more to this sport than cubic dollars through turnstiles on a given weekend. If folks like the Trueman family are happy with 25,000 - 30,000 folks coming through the gate on an IRL weekend, who are you to say that is insufficient? Tony also seems to be pretty happy with that concept, so again why aren't you?

Gary

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 04:59

A difference without a disctinction. Certainly USAC was the Indy 500 sanctioning body, without a doubt. But so what, to the fans, sponsors and teams the Indy 500 was part of the same schedule of events as the rest of the CART sanctioned season.

If you are not paid then there is no sanction. They had a chance thus NO IRL but they voted no. Was there a different sanction in 1996?

Oh please, explain to me how the 28-5 rule was not a lockout. And spare me the garbage about all the teams had to do was commit to two (or was it threee) other races. That was a sham and we both know it.

CART changed their chassis rules April 4th,1995. According to Lola, Reynard and Honda they could not run the 1996 500 with those chassis and Honda was building engines to chassis.
25-8 was announced July 8th, 1995. Now if you want to believe that July comes before April then fine. I covered the O'Hare Hyatt Regency CART meeting for a local Radio Station. I was told by EVERY CAR OWNER this was their last 500.

What a stinking load of malarkey. It did not work well for etiher series. Many of us saw the handwriting on the wall immediately. There was no way it would EVER work. It was no more than a high stakes game of chicken. It was just like the example stated earlier, if you split the NFL into two leagues one with the superbowl and the other with the major markets would they both survive?

Yes but the OWNERS do not think they are bigger than the SPORT. The INDIANAPOLIS 500 IS THE SPORT. There is the malarkey.

INDY CARS not LONG BEACH CARS.

AntiSpeed

10th June 2008, 05:00

Huh? Ask one I do not have my mind reading brain installed.

Allow me to clarify;

I haven't, but I would LOVE to if you could point me in the right direction...

What is this "CART Simon White Paper of 1993" and where can I read it?

... I'm curious to where your intimate knowledge of CART's finances comes from (again, if you could point me in the right direction, I would love nothing more than to peruse them myself).

How do you know so much about the financial details of CART and where can I obtain such knowledge for myself?

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 05:01

That assumes that the ONLY value to the series is the dollars that come through the gate. That money is only important to Eddie, not the series.

Certainly you are not going to get that sort of gate numbers at a road course. I will accept that as fact. But the value of road and street courses to the series is the cache given the drivers that can excel in a variety of disciplines. There is much more to this sport than cubic dollars through turnstiles on a given weekend. If folks like the Trueman family are happy with 25,000 - 30,000 folks coming through the gate on an IRL weekend, who are you to say that is insufficient? Tony also seems to be pretty happy with that concept, so again why aren't you?

Gary

I do not mind Road Racing. We have some here that want to get back to the CCWS schedule. I am happy with what we got. Clean it up and get off of NASCAR dates. Remember my early concept and still end at Chicago.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 05:04

What is this "CART Simon White Paper of 1993" and where can I read it?

National Speed Sport News in November of 1993 Page 2, 21 and 22

How do you know so much about the financial details of CART and where can I obtain such knowledge for myself?

I worked for them in the beginning and still had people on the inside through the early 1990s. Reading NSSN and going to races and talking to fans. THEY KNEW!

garyshell

10th June 2008, 05:38

A difference without a distinction. Certainly USAC was the Indy 500 sanctioning body, without a doubt. But so what, to the fans, sponsors and teams the Indy 500 was part of the same schedule of events as the rest of the CART sanctioned season.

If you are not paid then there is no sanction. They had a chance thus NO IRL but they voted no. Was there a different sanction in 1996?

I never once disagreed that USAC was the sanctioning body. What I said was it didn't make any difference who was. To the fans, sponsors and teams, the Indy 500 was part of the same schdeule of events as the rest of the CART schedule. It contributed heavily to the well being of the CART series.

Oh please, explain to me how the 28-5 rule was not a lockout. And spare me the garbage about all the teams had to do was commit to two (or was it three) other races. That was a sham and we both know it.

CART changed their chassis rules April 4th,1995. According to Lola, Reynard and Honda they could not run the 1996 500 with those chassis and Honda was building engines to chassis. 25-8 was announced July 8th, 1995. Now if you want to believe that July comes before April then fine. I covered the O'Hare Hyatt Regency CART meeting for a local Radio Station. I was told by EVERY CAR OWNER this was their last 500.

Then why was there any need for the 25-8 rule? What purpose would it serve. If your "history" is correct than it makes King George look a lot more stupid than any of us ever thought.

What a stinking load of malarkey. It did not work well for either series. Many of us saw the handwriting on the wall immediately.

Yes but the OWNERS do not think they are bigger than the SPORT. The INDIANAPOLIS 500 IS THE SPORT. There is the malarkey.

INDY CARS not LONG BEACH CARS.

This laste quote has no logic in it whatsoever. What is it that you are trying to say???

Gary

garyshell

10th June 2008, 05:43

I do not mind Road Racing. We have some here that want to get back to the CCWS schedule. I am happy with what we got. Clean it up and get off of NASCAR dates. Remember my early concept and still end at Chicago.

Finally we have something we can almost agree on. I don't want to go back to the CCWS schedule. I would like to add a couple of their dates back in. Cleveland and Road America. Ending in Chicago means zero to me, I do agree it needs to end before the NFL is in full swing, but where is unimportant. (Honest question: What do you think is so important about ending in Chicago? I do think it should NOT end in Australia.)

Gary

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 05:49

I never once disagreed that USAC was the sanctioning body. What I said was it didn't make any difference who was. To the fans, sponsors and teams, the Indy 500 was part of the same schdeule of events as the rest of the CART schedule. It contributed heavily to the well being of the CART series.

In the 1980's it wasn't on the CART schedule, they just didn't schedule against it. THEY COULD HAVE HAD IT but refused to vote in December of 1991.

Then why was there any need for the 25-8 rule? What purpose would it serve. If your "history" is correct than it makes King George look a lot more stupid than any of us ever thought.

CART scheduled the 1996 RA race against the NHIS IRL event in 1996. They did it at RA and said it was there traditional date. July 8th is not August 14th. The 25/8 was done only to get the cars to the first 2 races. TG rolled the dice that the CART teams would not show and they didn't. Had they it would have 25/8 in reverse.
It was done to get them off the pot.

This laste quote has no logic in it whatsoever. What is it that you are trying to say???

The CART CAR OWNERS THOUGHT THEY WERE BIGGER THAN THE SPORT. THE 500 IS THE SPORT.
For 92 years races come and go but one constant, the Indianapolis 500. Following this as long as you have I really shouldn't have to explain it.

No NFL, MLB, NBA or NHL Owner thinks they can do a better job running the sport. They need support of other teams.
CART voted 25-0 to change their chassis thus thumbing their nose at the Speedway.
They were bigger than the sport. They did that after voting down the same rules package in January of 1995. Then there would be no need for 25 and 8.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 05:51

Finally we have something we can almost agree on. I don't want to go back to the CCWS schedule. I would like to add a couple of their dates back in. Cleveland and Road America. Ending in Chicago means zero to me, I do agree it needs to end before the NFL is in full swing, but where is unimportant. (Honest question: What do you think is so important about ending in Chicago? I do think it should NOT end in Australia.)

Gary

Ratings that people worry so much about.

No Cleveland no Road America. Mid-Ohio and Miwaukee covers that market.

indycool

10th June 2008, 06:12

Whoops....watched a TV show for an hour and got real behind here.

Anti- , the Simons' report was done honestly and was roundly criticized by many other car owners who just wanted to fight somebody. That happened throughout CART history. The late Andy Kenopensky of the Machinists Union demanded a democratic process once and actually got it off the ground for a short while. The late Tony Bettenhausen, at one time, thought he had the votes mustered to give the Buicks more boost and draw some more cars but he got double-crossed by a couple owners. Some of the smaller guys tried to make sense of it but the bigger guys wanted to fight the Speedway or F1 or whoever they could pick a fight with.

WALDO, don't get too definite about PPG money, which originally started as $3,500 per car per race plus the point fund, then went up to a $100,000 pole award, starter's rings for 33 drivers and $5,000 per car for the "500," which PPG contributed to Indy to make it a part of the PPG Indy Car World Series, NOT part of a CART series. PPG, with its money, forced CART to accept the "500" as it was and in doing so, strengthened the name of the PPG Indy Car World Series. Some big CART kids were furious, but since PPG was paying a ton of the freight, they had to keep their traps shut.

The CART board changed its makeup in both size and people with the wind through all those years. Eventually, it went to a franchise system and each owner that fielded two cars got two "franchises." Forsythe kept Steve Horne's Tasman team afloat, asked for a third franchise, was turned down, got POed and closed it down.

When the IPO happened, each team got 400,000 shares per car, contingent on the owner keeping them for a certain length of time (think it was a year). Penske was the first to sell out the first day he could because he didn't believe in the thing.

CART payoffs and purses changed similarly through all those years. It stopped announcing purses sometime in the late '80s or early '90s. Who knows what anyone got?

Rex Monaco

10th June 2008, 06:17

So the split cost $6,000,000.

Wait a second, a few posts ago you said this:

The IRL made around $10,000,000 over the last 12 years.

So exactly how did you get from they made around $10 million to the split cost them $6 million? If we are going to pull random numbers out of our asses, why not add the $6 million to the $10 million and claim that the IRL lost $16 million?

garyshell

10th June 2008, 06:20

In the 1980's it wasn't on the CART schedule, they just didn't schedule against it.

And why didn't they schedule against it? Because everyone considered it part of the schedule. By 1985 USAC only had one race per year, the Indy 500.

CART scheduled the 1996 RA race against the NHIS IRL event in 1996. They did it at RA and said it was there traditional date. July 8th is not August 14th. The 25/8 was done only to get the cars to the first 2 races. TG rolled the dice that the CART teams would not show and they didn't. Had they it would have 25/8 in reverse.
It was done to get them off the pot.

But, again if your history is correct and ALL of the teams told YOU they would not run the 500, why was there any need to do this? What dime was this getting them off of?

Yes but the OWNERS do not think they are bigger than the SPORT. The INDIANAPOLIS 500 IS THE SPORT. There is the malarkey.

INDY CARS not LONG BEACH CARS.

This last quote has no logic in it whatsoever. What is it that you are trying to say???

The CART CAR OWNERS THOUGHT THEY WERE BIGGER THAN THE SPORT. THE 500 IS THE SPORT.
For 92 years races come and go but one constant, the Indianapolis 500. Following this as long as you have I really shouldn't have to explain it.

I agree totally that the linchpin is, was and shall be the 500. What needed clarification was your wording. Clear now, with the revision.

Gary

Rex Monaco

10th June 2008, 06:25

The CART CAR OWNERS THOUGHT THEY WERE BIGGER THAN THE SPORT. THE 500 IS THE SPORT.
For 92 years races come and go but one constant, the Indianapolis 500. Following this as long as you have I really shouldn't have to explain it.

And in 12 short years, it went from a historical race that manufacturers spent money on to win to being a spec race for up and coming drivers to make their name for themselves on their way up the NASCAR ladder.

Rex Monaco

10th June 2008, 06:29

No NFL, MLB, NBA or NHL Owner thinks they can do a better job running the sport.

Likewise, the stadium and arena owners don't think they can do a better job of running those sports.

garyshell

10th June 2008, 06:32

Ratings that people worry so much about.

No Cleveland no Road America. Mid-Ohio and Miwaukee covers that market.

Why does ending in Chicago contribute to ratings??? Wouldn't another date in Chicago garner the same ratings?

Yes, Mid-Ohio and Clevland are about an hour and 45 minutes apart, but the two places served different AND overlapping markets. (MidOhio is a nice Day trip for southwest Ohio, northern Kentucky, southeast Indiana. Cleveland is not. Likewise Cleveland drew from other areas that Mid-Ohio didn't.) They did ok on the same schedule for a few years in Cleveland's hey day. But the big reason I would like to see Cleveland is it offered some of the best racing in the series.

RA and Milwaukee can't even be compared. I do think they could both exist.

Gary

tbyars

10th June 2008, 07:25

How do you know so much about the financial details of CART and where can I obtain such knowledge for myself?

AntiSpeed, remember that CART was a public company. Everything they spent and everything they brought in was detailed to the penny in their quarterly SEC filings and annual reports, and all of that was public.

To all, let me try to successfully merge two divergent themes in this thread.

A lot of folks are talking about how much this series or that series has made or spent over the years. That's particularly tough when you are talking about the IRL since it's a private company so anything that is thrown out there is nothing but guesswork.

It was certainly much easier with CART, because it WAS public.

But one of the things a lot of folks confuse is that there are two levels of "who made or spent what." One is at the series level and one is at the promoter level.

For example, lots of folks have, over the years, pointed to the last Phoenix race and have said, with only 9,000 folks in the stands, the IRL must have lost its shirt on that race.

I would suggest that the IRL probably did pretty well on that race. They got their sanction fee, regardless of the attendance. They got paid for TV. Now, the promoter for that race probably indeed lost his shirt.

Don't confuse the two. And keep that in mind below.

In this thread, a lot of folks have also debated what "killed" CART/CCWS. I submit it was NOT the IRL in any shape or fashion.

The single most important factor, I believe, in what killed CART was their stated decision to become, in their own words, "a race promotion business rather than just a race sanctioning business." (Garyshell, you hit on this briefly.)

When CART, by their own choice, started concentrating on becoming race promoters in addition to a sanctioning body for many of their races, it cut out the middle man. In this case, that also meant taking on all the risk. Additionally, they all of a sudden had no one to pay them sanction fees because they were promoting their self-sanctioned races.

CART, who had never made boatloads of money anyway (mostly showing profits about equal to its interest income) immediately started losing money big time.

The exact same malady was evident with CCWS, who originally said they were NOT going to be in the race promotion business.

With that in mind, AntiSpeed, I would submit to you that the REAL reason TG and the IRL survived was because they have SUCCESSFULLY avoided the temptation to not, with the exception of Indy, NOT promote their own races.

Nickfalzone, the IRL didn't put CART/CCWS out of business. The decision to promote their own races ultimately did.

I STRONGLY believe this is a key in the whole deal over the past decade that far too many folks miss.

tbyars

10th June 2008, 07:36

I think the main reason Gossage is saying this is because he knows Lanigan would like to have the Houston street race on the '09 IRL calendar, along with Cleveland.

Chamoo, I don't agree with you often.

I've worked with Eddie pretty closely in the past, and got to know him very well. He's a great track promoter.

But there is MUCH more truth in what you are saying in regard to Eddie's comments this weekend than most folks realize. He certainly aggressively protects his turf. This was one instance. It was my very first thought when I read his comments.

indycool

10th June 2008, 12:56

Agreed on tb's post.

Yes, the IPO came in '97 or so. But subsequent public filings should give a pretty close idea on where CART was financially previous to going public. Its operation really didn't change.

Rex Monaco

10th June 2008, 14:06

The single most important factor, I believe, in what killed CART was their stated decision to become, in their own words, "a race promotion business rather than just a race sanctioning business."

I've always beleived that CART killed itself. There were many decisions CART made that hurt it financially as well as it's credibility. And self promotion was definitely a major reason for it's financial bleeding.

But CART's schedule on a diversity of tracks was not part of the reason for their death.

And thus, those in this thread that want to blame their death on the model of not being an all oval series are not as well informed as they wish themselves to be.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 14:31

Why does ending in Chicago contribute to ratings??? Wouldn't another date in Chicago garner the same ratings?

Yes, Mid-Ohio and Clevland are about an hour and 45 minutes apart, but the two places served different AND overlapping markets. (MidOhio is a nice Day trip for southwest Ohio, northern Kentucky, southeast Indiana. Cleveland is not. Likewise Cleveland drew from other areas that Mid-Ohio didn't.) They did ok on the same schedule for a few years in Cleveland's hey day. But the big reason I would like to see Cleveland is it offered some of the best racing in the series.

RA and Milwaukee can't even be compared. I do think they could both exist.

Gary

It has been a traditional date since it opened and gets 70,000 paid for the ARCA show and the same for the IRL. Chicago is the 3rd largest market, close to home base and again a series living on the ovals should end on the ovals.

IRL said they will not do both Cleveland and Mid-Ohio. I take them at their word even though most here do not.

Milwaukee gets 30,000 and RA gets 30,000. It appears to be the same 30,000. Again they must draw from Chicago as RA advertises heavy in this market as does the Milwaukee mile.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 14:36

Wait a second, a few posts ago you said this:

So exactly how did you get from they made around $10 million to the split cost them $6 million? If we are going to pull random numbers out of our asses, why not add the $6 million to the $10 million and claim that the IRL lost $16 million?

One year, CART lost $3,000,000 and the IRL lost $3,000,000 that was $6,000,000 between the two in 1997.

So in years following the IRL made money. Is that hard to figure?

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 14:47

And why didn't they schedule against it? Because everyone considered it part of the schedule. By 1985 USAC only had one race per year, the Indy 500.

In 1985 the Gold Crown Championship paid a larger point fund to its Champion Danny Sullivan than did CART.

But, again if your history is correct and ALL of the teams told YOU they would not run the 500, why was there any need to do this? What dime was this getting them off of?

Forcing their hand. Actually they killed some teams later because Sponsors left due to the hardline approach the owners took. See these guys took money without the understanding that 65% of the money was for Indy.
In future years that money started to dry up.
You must remember they told all teams not to sell equipment. Dale Coyne goes in NSSN with 13 legal chassis. They tried to get FORD and Ilmor not to supply engines. FORD did. They called former CART team sponsors and one of these cause RP to pay a large sum of cash to Foyt over tampering with Texaco.
If the CART guys showed up they would have had 22 spots of the 25. Thus the IRL would have died. Tony George gave them the chance to kill the IRL and CART did nothing.

I agree totally that the linchpin is, was and shall be the 500. What needed clarification was your wording. Clear now, with the revision.

Gary

92 years of history do not lie. Look at my 1968 piece 28 races and how many still remain? Two

garyshell

10th June 2008, 15:53

It has been a traditional date since it opened and gets 70,000 paid for the ARCA show and the same for the IRL. Chicago is the 3rd largest market, close to home base and again a series living on the ovals should end on the ovals.

IRL said they will not do both Cleveland and Mid-Ohio. I take them at their word even though most here do not.

Milwaukee gets 30,000 and RA gets 30,000. It appears to be the same 30,000. Again they must draw from Chicago as RA advertises heavy in this market as does the Milwaukee mile.

I understand that Chicago is a successful and IMPORTANT market to cover. My only question was is there anything "magic" about the date that requires it to be the last race on the schedule?

I too, take them at their word. I just wish they would change their mind. And I readily admit is an emotional, even possibly irrational, wish. Mid-Ohio is my "home" track (even though I live much closer to the Kentucky speedway), so I do NOT want to see it off the schedule. But like I said, Cleveland ALWAYS offered some of the most exciting races I ever saw from CART or ChampCar.

I think your assesment of Milwaukee and RA is incorrect. Sure there is SOME overlap. But I suspect (again an admitted GUT feel) that it is much smaller than you imply.

Gary

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 16:33

I understand that Chicago is a successful and IMPORTANT market to cover. My only question was is there anything "magic" about the date that requires it to be the last race on the schedule?

History: 2001 Labor Day Weekend. 2002-2008 the Weekend after Labor Day. To make a schedule work there must be some constants. This has become one. Since ABC/ESPN told the IRL in 2005 that this was the way it is, I guess you do what they want, not what the fans desire.

I too, take them at their word. I just wish they would change their mind. And I readily admit is an emotional, even possibly irrational, wish. Mid-Ohio is my "home" track (even though I live much closer to the Kentucky speedway), so I do NOT want to see it off the schedule. But like I said, Cleveland ALWAYS offered some of the most exciting races I ever saw from CART or ChampCar.

No arguement here but Burke Lakefront Airport's future is uncertain so more than likely it is gone forever.

I think your assesment of Milwaukee and RA is incorrect. Sure there is SOME overlap. But I suspect (again an admitted GUT feel) that it is much smaller than you imply.

They advertise in the Chicago Market and most people are from the Chicago Metro area at both tracks. I did both for years, as that feline was born near RA and all the plates around us were Land of Lincoln.
This was an issue when Carl Haas took over the promotion at the Mile in the early 1990's that RA was effecting his crowd. Thus they moved it to the end of September.

djparky

10th June 2008, 17:41

indycool

10th June 2008, 18:16

Schedule comes down to so many different things, weather at the time of year, financial stability of the promoter, what the deal is, sponsor interest in the market, what TV times are available on what networks, etc., etc., etc.

As a priority if you're going to guess what'll be on the schedule, "follow the money." If you're wishin' and hopin', you'll probably be disappointed.

Rex Monaco

10th June 2008, 19:03

One year, CART lost $3,000,000 and the IRL lost $3,000,000 that was $6,000,000 between the two in 1997.

So in years following the IRL made money. Is that hard to figure?

I guess I better send for the Waldo Super Decoder Ring so I can better understand the hidden messages inside your posts.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 20:12

I guess I better send for the Waldo Super Decoder Ring so I can better understand the hidden messages inside your posts.

See dozen years ago 3 of us who knew the truth decided they were sick and tired of the hatred being directed at us. So since we knew the truth then we could easily twist things so the CART fanatics would believe it. We joined CART sites and spewed stuff including that TG spent the Hulman Fortune to keep the IRL alive.
Simple in 1997, CART lost $3,000,000. So we put out a number of $300,000,000 to keep a series worth $30,000,000 alive. It was interesting that we found that for some it was easy to accept things as fact if they wanted to believe it rather than going and reading a NSSN of that day to find the IRL was spending $30,000,000 and about $3,000,000 wasn't covered. So the split cost $6,000,000. The CART fans accepted $300,000,000 but would not accept any CART losses.
On these boards we made over 15,000 posts and then go back to the Indy Star and get beaten up by our own spew. We laughed and did it through the end of 2007.
It was like fishing. For an IRL fan to bite you needed to bait the hook real well. (How does he know something I do not?) They could toss the hook.
The CART Fans just throw a hook in the water and you caught at least 10. (I read it here on a PRO CART BOARD so it has to be true)
Some of our stuff ended up on AR1 as FACT.

See we found the average CART fan read nothing about the series other than what was spoon fed to them. The IRL fan wasn't much more hungry for knowledge so it left the fans clueless to the truth.

Truth is easy to find. The other day, I was reading the 2008 500 Program. Many things that tell you how this series is paid for is in there if you are willing to reading and use a calculator and a piece of paper.

If you don't then you will say; as it is widely believed that TG spent much more money than this to keep the IRL afloat. My best work from May of 1998.

Does the decoder ring show you that you have been had? :D

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 20:14

Likewise, the stadium and arena owners don't think they can do a better job of running those sports.

It is called NASCAR.

16&Gtown

10th June 2008, 20:16

I guess I better send for the Waldo Super Decoder Ring so I can better understand the hidden messages inside your posts.

it's detardo, not super decoder. I have a patent pending. It took weeks to crack that code.

!!WALDO!!

10th June 2008, 20:23

it's detardo, not super decoder. I have a patent pending. It took weeks to crack that code.

You still just don't get it. It is English.

I was just at 16th and Georgetown and I heard it spoken.

Rex Monaco

10th June 2008, 22:52

Does the decoder ring show you that you have been had? :D

I'm sorry, was that a serious post? I thought it was an attempt by you to be funny.

Now I know that I really need that decoder ring!

DrDomm

11th June 2008, 00:04

INDY CARS not LONG BEACH CARS.

You finally hit the nail on the ****ing head. The reason TG and the IRL outlasted CART/CC is because of Indy. It's not because of 80% ovals. It's because of one oval, that's history and allure still captivates race fans around the world. It's because of this one race, not the IRL or its failed vision, that we can hope for a bright future.

It was obvious to me that when TG decided to add a few road/street courses, Champcar was doomed. The IRL could always add these types of races, but CC could never add Indy.

The best strategy that TG can adopt is to pick successful races, regardless of whether they are oval, street, or roadcourses. My personal preference is for road/street courses and large superspeedways (but only for 500 milers...nothing less).

Lastly, you cannot equate the history and prestige of Indy with the success of oval racing. Indy is unique, and it's success does not automatically translate into natural preference of "formula for success" for openwheel oval racing. Openwheel cars and roadcourses go hand in hand. Street races have a natural appeal to the general public. The equal combination of all three could be awesome.

indycool

11th June 2008, 00:31

When you said, "pick successful races," I think that will be a dominating factor and says it all.

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 01:08

I'm sorry, was that a serious post? I thought it was an attempt by you to be funny.

Now I know that I really need that decoder ring!

Nope, I was one that was putting out the garbage you are so fond of quoting.

It was all spew and you believed it.

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 01:10

You finally hit the nail on the ****ing head. The reason TG and the IRL outlasted CART/CC is because of Indy. It's not because of 80% ovals. It's because of one oval, that's history and allure still captivates race fans around the world. It's because of this one race, not the IRL or its failed vision, that we can hope for a bright future.

It was obvious to me that when TG decided to add a few road/street courses, Champcar was doomed. The IRL could always add these types of races, but CC could never add Indy.

The best strategy that TG can adopt is to pick successful races, regardless of whether they are oval, street, or roadcourses. My personal preference is for road/street courses and large superspeedways (but only for 500 milers...nothing less).

Lastly, you cannot equate the history and prestige of Indy with the success of oval racing. Indy is unique, and it's success does not automatically translate into natural preference of "formula for success" for openwheel oval racing. Openwheel cars and roadcourses go hand in hand. Street races have a natural appeal to the general public. The equal combination of all three could be awesome.

Many don't believe this but when Open Wheel was "stock" it was its most successful. That was over by 1932 or 1933.

MDS

11th June 2008, 12:41

indycool

11th June 2008, 13:55

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 14:17

You do know Chicago basically holds NASCAR fans hostage and forces them to buy a "Season Ticket package" to ever race the speedway holds because they refuse to sell single seats to the Cup race there.

So did MIS in the early 1990's. I got good tickets that way from Cup Fans not wanting to go to the CART races. You know who owned it then? Roger Penske.

I know people that have tickets to Lowes, they buy the package there and the IRL isn't running there any more.

See the CART/CCWS fans have a problem with this ever since Fontana got dropped. NASCAR/IRL/CART were all part of the season package. It goes back to its originial owner, Roger Penske.

DrDomm

11th June 2008, 14:43

Many don't believe this but when Open Wheel was "stock" it was its most successful. That was over by 1932 or 1933.

Ok, I'll be the first to admit that I have no clue what openwheel racing was like in the 1930's. Nor do I care. Nor should TG care. You can't expect a 75-year-old model to translate into success in today's sports entertainment landscape. And I don't think the subject of this thread is about a "stock" formula. It's about the ratio of course types.

Let me just say one other thing about some of the arguments during the last 7 pages. The thought that dwindling attendance at some(or all) of CART/CC's road/street course venues cannot be interpreted as this type of circuit being less preferred to oval racing by the viewing public. People come to a race(or any sporting event) for the entire package. And everyone knows that after the split, and then again after the defection of the manufacturers, CART/CC's package became compromised. And the mere existence of this weakened series compromised the IRL, as well. The continued growth of a unified stockcar series with solid leadership and direction really weakened the two. It probably wasn't CART/CC's formula that led to it's demise, but merely that it lost it's relevance without Indy, it's manufacturers, and it's teams and drivers.

So, I just don't buy an argument that's foundation is that CART/CC failed because no one in the US wants to see exotic cars on a road or street course. A balanced schedule, with well promoted and managed races, is what will serve this series the best.

For those of us who love roadracing, we're going to have to get used to some weekends being on ovals. Afterall, they're not all bad. For those of you who think that by winning the war, we're going to see one SMI track followed by another and then a couple of ISC tracks, I think you're going to have to get used to some road and street circuits.

For IC, who finds roadcourse fans snobby because we think roadracing is a better test of skill...too bad. It's nothing personal. We listen to the "there's no passing in roadracing" line from oval fans all the time. All of us have a preference, it doesn't mean we can't appreciate the other discipline(whether for skill, courage, entertainment, etc) as well.

Eventually, TG is going to be able to cherry pick whatever 22 or so venues he wants. My hope (and I think this will happen) is that he keeps it balanced, adding some historic roadcourses, some of the CART/CC street courses, and Michigan and Fontana.

Alexamateo

11th June 2008, 14:59

92 years of history do not lie. Look at my 1968 piece 28 races and how many still remain? Two

Just something to think about, If you compare it to NASCAR, 13 races from their 1968 schedule remain, and if you jump foward just one year to 1969(Talladega, Dover, and Michigan were added in 1969), 19 races that were on the 1969 schedule remain today.

indycool

11th June 2008, 16:13

Yep, doctor, I agree with the paragraph referring to me in your post, both ways. For myself, quite honestly, it's not "either or." I like ovals better, but I enjoy a good road race, too. I expect that view may be part of the "silent majority", all things considered.

The trouble with picking up some of the CC events is that they were mostly self-promotions or co-promotions at the end and I doubt the IRL is willing to do those things now and I also doubt the independent promoters that shared the risk are willing to put up all the jack or have solid financial footing. And I believe that's going to decide a good portion of what continues and what doesn't.

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 16:52

Ok, I'll be the first to admit that I have no clue what openwheel racing was like in the 1930's. Nor do I care. Nor should TG care. You can't expect a 75-year-old model to translate into success in today's sports entertainment landscape. And I don't think the subject of this thread is about a "stock" formula. It's about the ratio of course types.

See back in the days prior, these cars ran in Road and Direct Point races. These races were not successful. By the late 1920s when Board Tracks were in vogue 70,000 people would show up. Do you not think that 70,000 in 1928 was an accomplishment since the roads were junk and most advertising came from newsprint and telephone pole posters. In today's world that would be 350,000.

Let me just say one other thing about some of the arguments during the last 7 pages. The thought that dwindling attendance at some(or all) of CART/CC's road/street course venues cannot be interpreted as this type of circuit being less preferred to oval racing by the viewing public. People come to a race(or any sporting event) for the entire package.

Research has shown people do not like to pay loads of money for 15 seconds every lap. NASCAR 20 plus years ago was looking at a LR Series. (Left-Right) Their marketing found that it would fail as people wanted to see the whole track. Notice they run only 2 races.
The whole package to the race fan is the whole track. That is what killed racing this way in the 19 teens.

And everyone knows that after the split, and then again after the defection of the manufacturers, CART/CC's package became compromised. And the mere existence of this weakened series compromised the IRL, as well. The continued growth of a unified stockcar series with solid leadership and direction really weakened the two. It probably wasn't CART/CC's formula that led to it's demise, but merely that it lost it's relevance without Indy, it's manufacturers, and it's teams and drivers.
True and false. CART compromised their own package by letting the owners set the rules, sell the cars, lease the engines and supply parts.
IRL was just a dream of build it and they will come. Both were failures.

So, I just don't buy an argument that's foundation is that CART/CC failed because no one in the US wants to see exotic cars on a road or street course. A balanced schedule, with well promoted and managed races, is what will serve this series the best.

From the Vanderbilt in 1937 that counted for Points the next Road Course race for points was IRP in 1965. There was no professional Open Wheel Series in that time.
SCCA had the Formula A, Continental and then the USAC/SCCA Formula-5000. That series had some Indy Car drivers and was to serve as a path to INDY. It gave us a failed rookie in 1968 finally in 1977 known as Danny Ongais. The series failed.
CanAm Failed and CART did not address the Road Racing and Street Racing until other races began it fail.

For those of us who love roadracing, we're going to have to get used to some weekends being on ovals. Afterall, they're not all bad. For those of you who think that by winning the war, we're going to see one SMI track followed by another and then a couple of ISC tracks, I think you're going to have to get used to some road and street circuits.
I will accept where it is at not too much more and I hate to tell you, neither will the teams. In the 1980s ROGER PENSKE argued successfully that 16 races is the maximum an INDY CAR team can handle.

For IC, who finds roadcourse fans snobby because we think roadracing is a better test of skill...too bad. It's nothing personal. We listen to the "there's no passing in roadracing" line from oval fans all the time. All of us have a preference, it doesn't mean we can't appreciate the other discipline(whether for skill, courage, entertainment, etc) as well.

Actually Dirt racing is a better test of skill, 40 years ago. Amazing how a driver who won in the Dirt goes to Nassau and blows the field away for 2 days with ease, his first time in an RE car and on a Road Course. NASCAR’s successful winners on RC are Jeffy and Tony both that came from Dirt.

Eventually, TG is going to be able to cherry pick whatever 22 or so venues he wants. My hope (and I think this will happen) is that he keeps it balanced, adding some historic roadcourses, some of the CART/CC street courses, and Michigan and Fontana.

I would like to see that but it must be able to pay for itself. 22 races costs $90,000,000 just on the IRL end and it must have enough sponsorship, TV, Event Sponsors and supplier sponsors to whittle that number down to $14,000,000.
With this deal they are currently on the edge and are burning a bit of stored cash to make this work.
So maybe you better be happy with 20 races that are able to repeat themselves year after year.

garyshell

11th June 2008, 17:26

You do know Chicago basically holds NASCAR fans hostage and forces them to buy a "Season Ticket package" to ever race the speedway holds because they refuse to sell single seats to the Cup race there.

So what? It's the home facility for people there for racing. You buy season tickets for the Chicago Bears, you gotta take two worthless exhibition games. For the White Sox? Same when they play a contender but you gotta take the games against the lower teams, too. And maybe someone likes the Mariners and doesn't like the Yankees.

The concept of season tickets is not new.

IC, you are comparing apples and oranges. If you want a NASCAR ticket in Chicago you have to buy a season ticket. If you want a ticket to see the Bears you can by individual tickets, you are not forced to buy a season ticket. The single tickets might be up in the "nose bleed" section, but you can buy them.

Gary

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 18:03

IC, you are comparing apples and oranges. If you want a NASCAR ticket in Chicago you have to buy a season ticket. If you want a ticket to see the Bears you can by individual tickets, you are not forced to buy a season ticket. The single tickets might be up in the "nose bleed" section, but you can buy them.

Gary

No they are already sold but turned back in. SUPPLY AND DEMAND. NASCAR and the NFL have sponsors that buy corporately a season package then they turn back 80% of the tickets.

Chicagoland was a good example...."This race is a SELL OUT but GOOD TICKETS are now available."

Guess where? At the Start/Finish line 20 rows up. Sponsors turning back in tickets and the track resells them. Selling the same ticket twice. The NFL is the only other one to successfully do that.

So yes, you can buy a ticket but it has already been paid for once.

Rex Monaco

11th June 2008, 18:16

It was all spew and you believed it.

So you are using other peoples spew to support your own spew and you want me to take you seriously?

Rex Monaco

11th June 2008, 18:19

See the CART/CCWS fans have a problem with this ever since Fontana got dropped.

Yep, when they dropped CART and added the IRL in it's place, open wheel attendance took a HUGE hit at the California Speedway. The IRL was dropped soon after due to lack of interest.

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 19:14

So you are using other peoples spew to support your own spew and you want me to take you seriously?

Huh? I lived it, not read it on the internet. Sorry you believed that stuff but research would have given you the truth. The same research gave us the truth and thus we were able to twist into lies that CART fans would believe.

That's the internet for you.

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 19:17

Yep, when they dropped CART and added the IRL in it's place, open wheel attendance took a HUGE hit at the California Speedway. The IRL was dropped soon after due to lack of interest.

CART and the IRL were both on the schedule for a year I believe. The fires caused the cancellation of the last race and when ISC wanted their money back, CART had already spent it.

Watch Fontana, it may follow the path of Ontario due to a lack of Interest by Southern California race fans that do not like to sit in traffic.

MDS

11th June 2008, 19:36

So what? It's the home facility for people there for racing. You buy season tickets for the Chicago Bears, you gotta take two worthless exhibition games. For the White Sox? Same when they play a contender but you gotta take the games against the lower teams, too. And maybe someone likes the Mariners and doesn't like the Yankees.

The concept of season tickets is not new.

The "Season Ticket" at Chicago and Kansas are absolutely nothing like football season ticket holders having to buy two "Worthless" preseason games. Even if it were, you're saying equating an IRL offers the same entertainment value as a preseason football game. Why would anyone want to watch that? You're baseball analogy falls flat too because you always see the White Sox, where at Chicago if you buy a ticket to Dale Jr you get tickets to three series he doesn't race in, and one he doesn't even care for.

What is a more apt anology is if in order to buy my season tickets to the Thrashers I would also have to buy tickets to a the SEC Lacross campionships. Both sports use sticks and goalies and take place in the same building, so they're the same thing right? And in no world would I ever try to scaple those tickets or give them away... sure.

While no one knows for sure a large precentage, if not a majority of the "fans" in the stands at Kansas and Chicago, get tickets from NASCAR fans who give them away or auction them on Ebay or Stubhub at a deep, deep discount. The people who buy those tickets are NASCAR fans, and the ratings and attendence have show us for the last 12 years that the vast bulk of NASCAR fans don't like Indy cars.

To end the season in front of a crowd of people there because of free ticket is a disgrace. Playing in front of another sport's crowd is disgusting, fake, and needs to end.

indycool

11th June 2008, 19:41

First part of that is true, WALDO. ISC got special dispensation from the bankruptcy court in a bunch of legal maneuvering for its paid-in-advance fee to CART. It's all in the court records, for verification. The same thing had happened earlier at Texas, which had to sue to get their money back.

IMO, Fontana is in no danger. At an oval with 100,000-plus seats, a crowd of 60-70,000 makes it look a third empty. At a street course with 20,000 seats, a crowd of 18,000 makes it look full. Which had the bigger turnout? Fontana is "making the nut" on its crowds, despite not being sellouts.

Just like the Speedway. Former CART/CC fans used to point to the third-turn entry seating and say, "look at all that aluminum, the sky is falling." Even if there were 20,000 seats unfilled for the "500," there were more than 250,000 people there, more than TWICE what the Daytona 500 draws.

indycool

11th June 2008, 19:50

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 20:07

MDS, I respectfully disagree. Those are season ticket packages to racing. Period. If the IRL and/or ARCA or whatever else is included with NASCAR tickets in a package as a "perk," so be it. SOME of them must like it because there are fine crowds at Kansas and Chicago and other places.

I've sat in the stands and watched at Kentucky and Nashville with a bunch of fans around me at each place with all kinds of NASCAR gear on asking all kinds of questions. The first thing they say is, "wow, your cars go FAST." The fans stood much of both races. I have a friend who's a spotter who sometimes must walk down through the stands after a race and he tells me fans always tell him on the way down what a good show it was. And he says that includes NASCAR fans.

Then there's Jeff Gordon, who has said publicly that, if at all possible, he wouldn't miss a Texas IRL race on TV.

They're NASCAR fans but they're also OVAL fans and their "home tracks" are ovals. It is what it is.

The CART fans always had a problem with this except when they were part of the package. They have a problem with 35,000 fans showing up for a race and the attendance announced at 70,000. The concept of Tickets sold does not equate to butts in seats. True in all sports but as far as the IRL is concern is wrong.
Yet 210,000 show up for Mexico City and Gerry Forsythe can't go back in fear of being tossed in jail for not paying his bills.
Butts in Stands does not equate to profitability of an event. Tickets sold does.
I hear concessions, at Chicagoland most are leased out to Churches, groups and such so the Speedway already has its money.

indycool

11th June 2008, 20:35

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 21:05

The concession stands, at almost ALL tracks, go two-ways: 1) Leased space to a private vendor, or 2) The track provides the merchandise/food and drink and arranges for local service clubs and charity groups to man those stands on race weekends for a percentage of the take for the stand or a donation. But the tracks DO receive profits.

I got a friend who church leases a space at Chicagoland, a flat rate, nothing else.

Look I promoted races, the hardest thing was to go around and collect my share. My share of what?

For you to be right, then the Speedway must place a person or two in all booths.

This is why they went this direction as it cost more for staff than what they collected. In a cash business there are multiple ways of not showing everything.

How can a track determine a profit for a charity?

Even selling the Program is a fixed deal, they sell the Program for $12.50 to the vendor company with a face value of $20.00. They made there money because the Program cost them ZERO. They printed 6000.

Sorry, been involved in this end and even was one that suggested the tracks get out of the RETAIL Concession business and stay with the WHOLESALE Concession business. (Note the Program)

MDS

11th June 2008, 21:13

MDS, I respectfully disagree. Those are season ticket packages to racing. Period.

Under that logic the Bears could force their fans to buy tickets to the Chicago Arena Football team. It's still football, just football most NFL fan's aren't really passionate and don't really want to pay to see. Much like how the IRL is still racing, just a form of racing most NASCAR fans aren't passionate about and don't really want to pay to see.

I've sat in the stands and watched at Kentucky and Nashville with a bunch of fans around me at each place with all kinds of NASCAR gear on asking all kinds of questions. The first thing they say is, "wow, your cars go FAST." The fans stood much of both races. I have a friend who's a spotter who sometimes must walk down through the stands after a race and he tells me fans always tell him on the way down what a good show it was. And he says that includes NASCAR fans.

Then there's Jeff Gordon, who has said publicly that, if at all possible, he wouldn't miss a Texas IRL race on TV.

They're NASCAR fans but they're also OVAL fans and their "home tracks" are ovals. It is what it is.

It's the same problem that CART and CC had with street races. People show up because its cheep and its something to do. They enjoy themselves while they're there, but that doesn't translate into making them fans who will watch the races every Sunday. Same thing for the Indy crowd. A lot of people go to it and watch it because it's an event, but the vast majority of the TV audience clearly doesn't stick around.

Also, you're misleading yourself if you think that NASCAR fans are fans of oval racing in general. If that were true you would see spikes in IRL races where they aren't in direct competition with NASCAR races, and that just doesn't happen outside of once a year.

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 21:29

Under that logic the Bears could force their fans to buy tickets to the Chicago Arena Football team. It's still football, just football most NFL fan's aren't really passionate and don't really want to pay to see. Much like how the IRL is still racing, just a form of racing most NASCAR fans aren't passionate about and don't really want to pay to see.

The Bears play at Soldier Field and the Rush at the Allstate Area, 20 miles apart. The NASCAR races, ARCA and IRL all happen in the same place. LAME very LAME.

It's the same problem that CART and CC had with street races. People show up because its cheep and its something to do. They enjoy themselves while they're there, but that doesn't translate into making them fans who will watch the races every Sunday. Same thing for the Indy crowd. A lot of people go to it and watch it because it's an event, but the vast majority of the TV audience clearly doesn't stick around.

Also, you're misleading yourself if you think that NASCAR fans are fans of oval racing in general. If that were true you would see spikes in IRL races where they aren't in direct competition with NASCAR races, and that just doesn't happen outside of once a year.

They are fans of drivers, brands, tracks and then NASCAR. Nothing to do with what track they are at.
Another guess at the real habits of race fans by someone that must not go.
If you talk to a couple 100 fans a year at one Cup race you will be educated.

We sure don't want that.

indycool

11th June 2008, 21:48

WALDO, I agree that there are several different ways to do it, but the charities DO man the stands at most places and it's usually their biggest moneymaker of the year. I can see where a fixed deal (which I also posted that it might be a donation) would work better.

MDS, if you're living in Indianapolis, you're more likely to be a Colts fan than a Raiders fan. If you live in Oakland, you're more likely to be a Raiders fan. That's just geographic convenience and the hometown team.

That's the same with race tracks. If you look, a lot of ovals built road courses inside the oval and tried to promote road races through the years. These included Michigan, Charlotte, Phoenix and others. Indy tried F1. They were all, 100 percent of them, failures. The short tracks at Charlotte and Vegas? The locals are there when they have a program going.

And I don't hear of any plans to build ovals at Laguna, Infineon, Mid-Ohio, Road America, Lime Rock, Road atlanta, Mosport, etc. They're road racing tracks. They are what they are and their clientele is what it is.

MDS

11th June 2008, 22:04

The Bears play at Soldier Field and the Rush at the Allstate Area, 20 miles apart. The NASCAR races, ARCA and IRL all happen in the same place. LAME very LAME.

The Kansas MLS team plays in the same stadium as the KC Chiefs. So by your logic, since they're both technically called football, it is okay to ask NFL fans to buy MLS season tickets if they want to watch a NFL game in person because technically they're the same sport played in the arena? Since your defending the ISC policy so much would it be fair to say an NFL fan would be excited about this increase and price and all these new tickets because afterall Football is Futball

It would be like asking me to buy Hawks season tickets in order to buy Thrasher's season tickets. You're also saying I should be excited because apparently I'm not a hockey fan, I'm a fan of Phillips Arena

The pratice is bush league, its not helping the IRL find new fans, it keeps the tracks from having to promote those dates. It needs to be stopped.

indycool

11th June 2008, 22:40

!!WALDO!!

11th June 2008, 22:51

The Kansas MLS team plays in the same stadium as the KC Chiefs. So by your logic, since they're both technically called football, it is okay to ask NFL fans to buy MLS season tickets if they want to watch a NFL game in person because technically they're the same sport played in the arena? Since your defending the ISC policy so much would it be fair to say an NFL fan would be excited about this increase and price and all these new tickets because afterall Football is Futball

If you buy a skybox you buy if from the Stadium, thus all events are covered by that purchase including concerts.

It would be like asking me to buy Hawks season tickets in order to buy Thrasher's season tickets. You're also saying I should be excited because apparently I'm not a hockey fan, I'm a fan of Phillips Arena
That is how I get Blackhawk skyboxes because the purchaser is a Bulls fan. They buy these from the stadium. See at what lengths you reach for straws?

The pratice is bush league, its not helping the IRL find new fans, it keeps the tracks from having to promote those dates. It needs to be stopped.

Of course it is bush league because your sport could not get enough fans. The fans at Chicagoland that bought in at the beginning must pay $1500 per seat plus tickets every year for the first 10 years. Guess what? If you buy a season package to the Bears you buy a license also. If you give that seat to a moron for a game and he gets tossed you can lose your license.

All sports are using tie ins. The WhiteSox are promoting the Blackhawks with a hockey stick and a ball throw a small slot to win Season Tickets to the Blackhawks.

Only you and the CCWS want things to stand by themselves. Needs to be stopped because it is fair, to whom?

MDS

12th June 2008, 00:17

Baloney. If there is so much outright objection to the IRL by NASCAR fans, why do good crowds show up at those places? Why do they cheer? Why do they enjoy themselves? Sure, a small portion of the fandom might be grumping, but no moreso, IMO, than NFL season ticketholders having to buy exhibition games. You act like this is a big deal. It ain't.

http://www.motorsport.com/photos/indycar/2008/kan/indycar-2008-kan-tm-0146.jpg

What Crowd? That looks like maybe 30 percent capacity, maybe 20,000 people showed up. On TV it looks better attended because of the colored seats, but really, its a pretty paultry crowd and shouldn't be on next year's schedule.

Almost every one of those seats are sold for a NASCAR race, assuming Kansas doesn't make a lot of single tickets available to brokers, that looks like 60 percent or more of the NASCAR fans are voting with their feet. As they have done time and time again since Tony George decided to create a series that is NASCAR without fenders and tried to leach its growing popularity.

I'd aruge the IRL would do better if Kansas and Chicago released the race from the "Season ticket package" and promoted the race on its own merits.

IF the ICWS is going to survive it needs to race infront of fans who actually want to see it, not subsidized "crowds" like Mid-Ohio, Homestead, Kansas, Chicago, Nashville and Motegi. All of them need to either stand on their own or get off the schedule.

MDS

12th June 2008, 00:24

If you buy a skybox you buy if from the Stadium, thus all events are covered by that purchase including concerts.

I'm paying less than five grand for my Thrasher's season tickets. Do you think I could get a sky box for that?

indycool

12th June 2008, 01:17

Well, that doesn't show the WHOLE crowd, or the infield, and I don't see it looking as bad as you're trying to say.

Are you just trying to say NASCAR draws more people or what? Sure, NASCAR does.

And "subsidized" crowds at those places? Because title sponsorship was arranged and paid for those races? Maybe you don't understand that those "subsidies" are paid for by sponsorship in some form. A sponsorship can include a lot of things, from tickets to program ads to billboards to suites to other forms of identification, exposure or perquisites. They're all different and they're all priced differently. You want a lot, you pay a lot. You want a little, you pay a little.

Subsidized. Sheesh.

veeten

12th June 2008, 01:21

unfortunately, MDS, they would have to take a similar tact when having racing weekends with ALMS & Grand Am at the road courses & street tracks. Meaning that Road America, Long Beach, Infineon, Watkins Glen, St. Petersburg and others would be removed or have to be a stand alone race. And, as we've seen in recent years, only NASCAR has the 'staying power' to go a race weekend by itself. Even Formula 1 has to have a support race when doing overseas rounds to justify the weekend, both financially and logistically.

Remember, "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander", as they say.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 01:32

I'm paying less than five grand for my Thrasher's season tickets. Do you think I could get a sky box for that?

For 16 times that amount maybe but you get the Hawks and ZZ Top.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 01:34

http://www.motorsport.com/photos/indycar/2008/kan/indycar-2008-kan-tm-0146.jpg

What Crowd? That looks like maybe 30 percent capacity, maybe 20,000 people showed up. On TV it looks better attended because of the colored seats, but really, its a pretty paultry crowd and shouldn't be on next year's schedule.

Almost every one of those seats are sold for a NASCAR race, assuming Kansas doesn't make a lot of single tickets available to brokers, that looks like 60 percent or more of the NASCAR fans are voting with their feet. As they have done time and time again since Tony George decided to create a series that is NASCAR without fenders and tried to leach its growing popularity.

I'd aruge the IRL would do better if Kansas and Chicago released the race from the "Season ticket package" and promoted the race on its own merits.

IF the ICWS is going to survive it needs to race infront of fans who actually want to see it, not subsidized "crowds" like Mid-Ohio, Homestead, Kansas, Chicago, Nashville and Motegi. All of them need to either stand on their own or get off the schedule.

Again: EVERY TICKET IS PAID FOR!

Why is this tough to understand? CART survived for years on the same formula. Now with them gone it is a travesty.

Time to join this world.

veeten

12th June 2008, 01:42

Of course, one has to remember that a number of the team owners in the IRL also have teams in both NASCAR & ALMS/Grand Am, which makes it even more advantageous for teams, drivers, and owners to get thr most out of a race weekend.

MDS

12th June 2008, 01:54

Well, that doesn't show the WHOLE crowd, or the infield, and I don't see it looking as bad as you're trying to say.

So post some pictures that prove your point that. I say less than 20,000, there a number of pictures that show empty stands. If you say more, find some proof, I'll consider it.

unfortunately, MDS, they would have to take a similar tact when having racing weekends with ALMS & Grand Am at the road courses & street tracks. Meaning that Road America, Long Beach, Infineon, Watkins Glen, St. Petersburg and others would be removed or have to be a stand alone race.

Uhm, no, you can by one-day tickets to Long Beach.
http://www.gplb.com/ticket_prices.html

The idea of support races isn't bad, but forcing someone to buy tickets to a whole bunch of events they don't want to go to in order to prop up an event that could draw a better crowd somewhere else is wrong.

Again: EVERY TICKET IS PAID FOR!

Why is this tough to understand? CART survived for years on the same formula. Now with them gone it is a travesty.

Time to join this world.

So CART used subsidized racing and failed but somehow it will work for the IRL?

It doesn't matter if its paid for, its clear Kansas does not support open wheel racing. If the fans won't show up this year given the hype over Dancia, Graham and Unification they won't ever come to the track.

You point out that every seat was sold, and yet maybe a third, more likely a fourth, of the people who had tickets for that event didn't show up. I don't know what could possibly be a better reason to not race in Kansas when 60,000 had tickets and less than half showed up. All it would have cost them would be their time to show up, and they didn't even want to spend that.

They aren't fans, they don't want to come to the race when all they would have to pay for is gas, beer, food and parking because they already bought there ticket. They don't deserve to have a race.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 02:21

So CART used subsidized racing and failed but somehow it will work for the IRL?

CART didn't subsidized anything. Some tracks like MIS you bought NASCAR Tickets you got CART tickets. The track did that.

It doesn't matter if its paid for, its clear Kansas does not support open wheel racing. If the fans won't show up this year given the hype over Dancia, Graham and Unification they won't ever come to the track.

They made money so they don't care, it will be on the schedule next year.

You point out that every seat was sold, and yet maybe a third, more likely a fourth, of the people who had tickets for that event didn't show up. I don't know what could possibly be a better reason to not race in Kansas when 60,000 had tickets and less than half showed up. All it would have cost them would be their time to show up, and they didn't even want to spend that.

The track, ISC, the IRL, and the accountants see it 180 degrees different than you.

They aren't fans, they don't want to come to the race when all they would have to pay for is gas, beer, food and parking because they already bought there ticket. They don't deserve to have a race.

I see you don't go to races, parking cost nothing at most places. What race do they deserve to have? I know a CCWS race right?

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 02:27

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did the track package the tickets because that was the only way they could make the nut on an IRL race because no one wanted to come? Or is the low attendence because the promoter has his costs covered with the package and doesn't want to do the work to promote the race properly to attract a bigger crowd?

I don't have the answer, but that's a key question. If the former, then OW racing is doomed to be a (at best) 2nd tier series. If the latter, then too many contracts of convienience have been let with short term outlooks and risk taking is in short supply. Not a good situation for an organization with aspirations for future greatness.

Penske started it in 1981 and it carried over to Fontana. ISC followed suit at their tracks as did SMI.

I don't get it. Chicagoland gets their money in October for an IRL race run the following September. Yet, you want the promoter to have the runs on that weekend hoping he gets enough people and cash. Like Edmonton.

NASCAR has the right formula and it allows for the tracks to be profitable and survive. Your formula will lead to plowed under tracks or Outlet Malls where greatness occurred.

This not my opinion this is the history of this sport.

Somebody oh somebody explain 17,000 for the Questor GP in 1971 at Ontario.

MDS

12th June 2008, 02:28

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did the track package the tickets because that was the only way they could make the nut on an IRL race because no one wanted to come? Or is the low attendence because the promoter has his costs covered with the package and doesn't want to do the work to promote the race properly to attract a bigger crowd?

My understanding is Kansas wanted to have a full two weekends of activity and with three-top teir NASCAR races they needed a fourth draw to round out their season and the only way the IRL could schedule a race at Kansas is if they took the specific weekend with the trucks.

NASCAR/ISC is unwilling to help boost attendance at those tracks because it already serves its purprose. It doesn't cost them a whole lot to run the race the day after the trucks so why not. This rumor I think is backed up when ISC showed a completely unwillingness to work to accomodate Motegi moving or Surfer's on the schedule this year.

I don't have the answer, but that's a key question. If the former, then OW racing is doomed to be a (at best) 2nd tier series. If the latter, then too many contracts of convienience have been let with short term outlooks and risk taking is in short supply. Not a good situation for an organization with aspirations for future greatness.

Absolutely, the IRL should be working to find long term promotors who need to grow their events and as a result help the series grow, not some near-monolopy that doesn't need to do anything because every seat is already sold.

indycool

12th June 2008, 02:31

MDS, if you want to take one picture and estimate 20,000 fans in attendance out of the blue, don't ask me for "proof."

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 02:37

My understanding is Kansas wanted to have a full two weekends of activity and with three-top teir NASCAR races they needed a fourth draw to round out their season and the only way the IRL could schedule a race at Kansas is if they took the specific weekend with the trucks.

A weekend that netted them over $3,500,000 with all costs covered. Yup, they will drop it.

NASCAR/ISC is unwilling to help boost attendance at those tracks because it already serves its purprose. It doesn't cost them a whole lot to run the race the day after the trucks so why not. This rumor I think is backed up when ISC showed a completely unwillingness to work to accomodate Motegi moving or Surfer's on the schedule this year.

Again, all the money in place since November for all four dates. Nice that you do not need to collect most of your money on race day, like Surfers.

Absolutely, the IRL should be working to find long term promotors who need to grow their events and as a result help the series grow, not some near-monolopy that doesn't need to do anything because every seat is already sold.

What does a PROMOTER need? Don't answer a product or something silly like that. Think about it then the little light bulb will go on over your head and we can bring this to a close.

MDS

12th June 2008, 02:37

I see you don't go to races, parking cost nothing at most places. What race do they deserve to have? I know a CCWS race right?

I've paid to park at a number of races, Darlington, Long Beach, Las Vegas, North Wilksboro, Martinsville, Taladaga, a few events at Hickory Motorspeedway, Dixie, Eldora. There is a premium parking at almost every track I've ever gone to, while there is free parking I find its worth the $10 bucks if you want to get out of the track in a timely fashion.

Well I think Cleveland should have Kansas' date, or even Chicago's date. I couldn't think of a much more exciting place to end the season than Cleveland. But there a number of tracks out there that should get a shot. New Hampshire in Apirl is nice and crisp.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 02:42

I've paid to park at a number of races, Darlington, Long Beach, Las Vegas, North Wilksboro, Martinsville, Taladaga, a few events at Hickory Motorspeedway, Dixie, Eldora. There is a premium parking at almost every track I've ever gone to, while there is free parking I find its worth the $10 bucks if you want to get out of the track in a timely fashion.

Well I think Cleveland should have Kansas' date, or even Chicago's date. I couldn't think of a much more exciting place to end the season than Cleveland. But there a number of tracks out there that should get a shot. New Hampshire in Apirl is nice and crisp.

So have I but most today are free because they are hooking you so much. Yes the Mile has a grounds fee but the highest I paid was $20.00 at ASCOT in its final year.
Chicagoland, MIS and such are free.

Cleveland is gone forever. Read my Gentlemen Start Your... Thread. I bet it will be in July.

MDS

12th June 2008, 02:53

MDS, if you want to take one picture and estimate 20,000 fans in attendance out of the blue, don't ask me for "proof."

20,000 is generous

http://www.motorsport.com/photos/indycar/2008/kan/indycar-2008-kan-tm-0141.jpghttp://www.motorsport.com/photos/indycar/2008/kan/indycar-2008-kan-tm-0120.jpg

There's pictures covering the entire grandstand, sorry couldn't find any of the infield, but as you can see its well below half capacity, probably around 30 to 40 percent and you have to figure a good number of those are friends of people gave away their tickets or sold them cheap on Ebay. I checked ebay, tickets to either race were going for $5 to $15 before the race and a alot went unsold. That is not good for the series.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 03:12

Where did I say I wanted the promoter to do anything? I asked a question. Don't put words in my mouth.

What formula of mine? Putting words again. The king of obfuscation.

What I would like to see is the promoter/s AND the sanctioning body work together in everyone's best long term interest.

You took it down, yet you bring up good points. You took mine down that quoted you.

If you are going to accuse people of things then leave up your words otherwise you look petty.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 03:14

20,000 is generous

http://www.motorsport.com/photos/indycar/2008/kan/indycar-2008-kan-tm-0141.jpghttp://www.motorsport.com/photos/indycar/2008/kan/indycar-2008-kan-tm-0120.jpg

There's pictures covering the entire grandstand, sorry couldn't find any of the infield, but as you can see its well below half capacity, probably around 30 to 40 percent and you have to figure a good number of those are friends of people gave away their tickets or sold them cheap on Ebay. I checked ebay, tickets to either race were going for $5 to $15 before the race and a alot went unsold. That is not good for the series.

They were sold for $39.00 to the fans. 70,000 x $39.00 equals so much right. On Ebay was the track selling them or fans?

Fans trying to get some of their money back.

indycool

12th June 2008, 11:53

Well, MDS, as opposed to just taking your word for it, LINK?

speeddurango

12th June 2008, 12:10

MDS

12th June 2008, 12:27

Well, MDS, as opposed to just taking your word for it, LINK?

They don't release attendance figures, you probably know that. Those pictures are probably the best we have to go by. They look about a third full, the stands hold 60,000, so about 20,000 is a reasonable estimate. That's a lot more logical and fact base than anything I've seen claiming Kansas gets "Great Crowds"

indycool

12th June 2008, 13:03

Oh.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 17:59

Took what down, from which thread, and when? I don't recall any conversation on this subject before. And, yes, I have deleted some of your posts here that were either completely off topic or insulting to other members. Was it one of those?

I was copying a comment of yours and it didn't take, went back it was gone.

One of mine left also.

Must be magic.
Like magic it is back.

http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=488557&postcount=162

Was not there at 12:00AM CDT.

Oh well.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 18:07

They don't release attendance figures, you probably know that. Those pictures are probably the best we have to go by. They look about a third full, the stands hold 60,000, so about 20,000 is a reasonable estimate. That's a lot more logical and fact base than anything I've seen claiming Kansas gets "Great Crowds"

I thought the Kansis City newspaper said 70,000.

Funny even the NFL which requires an acxtual sell out so the game can be shown in the home market, can have half of the seats empty and the game on TV in that market. How is that if the seats aren't sold?

indycool

12th June 2008, 18:17

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 18:43

WALDO, no point in going any further. That's why I posted the way I did. One picture, pull a number out of the sky and post it long enough and maybe somebody will think it's true, even with no link, no statement, no nothing. A few who want to see things that way in the first place will "bite." The rest of us will know the CW jihad is just alive and well for the moment.

Oh yes, the Indy Star is under attack. Why? I feel that there a few positive things in the works for 2009 and they want to make sure these deals get queered. The only Regular Media print outlet that covers Indy car racing is the Indy Star with Curt Cavin. Yes, they have forums and those forums have been under attack for 10 years. Reason being was that if you got a proposal for sponsorship you would go to an Indy newspaper for info and then you may end up at the forums on do research and find vile stuff. It has been reported there that this cost both sides millions, BS! Reported in other publications, BS. I even got emails from people to go there and do the same since I knew the so called "truth", BS.

I remember one of these photos from chicagoland claiming to be a race photo, like this from the pits. Problem was the lighting was wrong, the sun was from the east. During the race the sun would be overhead. It was moring practice.

Again the TICKETS ARE SOLD AND PAID FOR ELEVEN MONTHS PRIOR TO THE RACE. As a former promoter, if I sold a ticket and they didn't show up, I didn't care because I got what I needed.

Now if you live and die on what comes through on race day like the CCWS did then it is easier to die than to live. Been there, done that and bought the t-shirt.

No, we are going back to the attempts to destroy the IRL in hopes that something Champ Car will rise from the ashes. No Tony George, turbo engines, dump Indy and go all road races all the time so they can sit at home and watch on TV drinking Beer and eating Potato Chips as the shows lose obcene amounts of money. As long as it isn't theirs.

MDS

12th June 2008, 19:16

WALDO, no point in going any further. That's why I posted the way I did. One picture, pull a number out of the sky and post it long enough and maybe somebody will think it's true, even with no link, no statement, no nothing. A few who want to see things that way in the first place will "bite." The rest of us will know the CW jihad is just alive and well for the moment.

You are such a partisan fighter you're defending racing in front of short crowds. It's not about continuing a fued, its about what is the best the sport, and it isn't racing in front of a few thousand fans who get free or drastically reduced tickets.

I have no Earthly idea why you're aguring to race in front of impassive observers, many of whom won't even show up if they get a free ticket. I heard form one of my marketing buddies that Marlboro gave away 30,000 free tickets to Homestead and only about half of those actually showed up. Miami does not want to watch open wheel oval racing. How many races in front of empty grandstands do you need to see before you realize that?

I don't so much care where they move those dates to, but before we're willing to give races away to markets that won't support them (ie require 20,000 free tickets from a cigarrette company to partially fill the stands) we should at least try places like Portland, New Hampshire, Gateway, Road America, Michigan, California, San Jose places where CART/CC was successful and could be again, instead of places like Kansas were at least half the people who bought a ticket to the event won't show up.

Basically you want to reward corporations over fans in cities that could welcome open wheel racing. Explain to me how empty grand stands at Homestead is better that a street festival in San Jose, which saw more passing last year, bigger crowds, and from what I heard actually made money or at least broke even.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 19:20

we should at least try places like Portland, New Hampshire, Gateway, Road America, Michigan, California, San Jose places where CART/CC was successful and could be again,

They are have something in common. They all lost money their last two years with CART/CCWS.

Sorry, those are the facts otherwise they would have NEVER come off the schedule.

Breeze

12th June 2008, 19:21

Oh yes, the Indy Star is under attack........................

No, we are going back to the attempts to destroy the IRL in hopes that something Champ Car will rise from the ashes. No Tony George, turbo engines, dump Indy and go all road races all the time so they can sit at home and watch on TV drinking Beer and eating Potato Chips as the shows lose obcene amounts of money. As long as it isn't theirs.

Waldo, you often have important and valid things to say in this forum. Why then, do you have to be such a ***** about it? The sarcasm and contempt drips from near every word your write. If you lost that attitude in your posts I think you'd find your information and opinion would quickly be respected and welcomed, if you cared to. If not, then never mind. ;)

With respect to selling tickets and filling stands, it seems several folks here are posting opinions from different perspectives. Its one thing for a promoter to get his desired ticket sales. For him that's the end all, be all. (more or less) For a series owner, team owner and interested fan, full grandstands are a harbinger of profitability. You may sell 70,000 tickets, but if only 30-40,000 show up to the race, it looks bad in person AND ON TV!! Full stands and good tv ratings are the end all be all for team owners and series owners as that's what bring in sponsorship money, the lifeblood of the sport (these days).

indycool

12th June 2008, 22:08

Breeze, the problem is that some of these folks, MDS in particular, do not understand the financing of professional sports in America in general and auto racing in particular, plus seem to have the notion that the CART/CC attendance figures were real.

MDS, let's go through your list of venues you consider that the series should go:

Portland -- Was taken over as a self-promote by CC because it needed the race and it was losing money because adequate sponsorship could not help to support the gate. CC couldn't make it profitable, either.

New Hampshire -- CART gave it up and IRL tried it and gave it up years ago. Under SMI, could be something to build on because SMI promotes well. SMI just bought it though, and doubt the IRL is in a big hurry.

Gateway -- A dump, dumped by both CART and IRL years ago because it was a dump and a loser.

Road America -- A contender for a future somewhere down the line after being screwed around and poisoned and sued by CART, cut off then reconstructed by CC on a shared risk deal that didn't draw flies and has no traditional place on the schedule. Another wait till the dust clears deal.

Michigan and California -- With 2 NASCAR races at each site, the tracks and IRL have been unable to strike a bargain on dates or fees. Likely to continue for awhile, unfortunately.

San Jose -- After all the money lost, racing over railroad tracks, backroom deals with the mayor and council, CC delivering short, Listwin quitting as promoter out of hand and the only reason it was there was a hurry-up substitute for a vacant Laguna, why would you even include this if you had a clue?

You are so oblivious to actual facts and how they play into the game that your Marlboro assertion went from 30,000 at Homestead to 20,000 in one paragraph. Neither sticks. Corporations buy tickets and suites to all sporting events. Maybe you don't like it but it's part of sports' financial structure. Deal with it.

Breeze

12th June 2008, 22:31

.................................................. .............
You are so oblivious to actual facts and how they play into the game that your Marlboro assertion went from 30,000 at Homestead to 20,000 in one paragraph. Neither sticks. Corporations buy tickets and suites to all sporting events. Maybe you don't like it but it's part of sports' financial structure. Deal with it.

And that's great for promoters as it assure's them (hopefully) of covering their costs and maybe even turning a profit.

I think the agonizing part of this whole discussion is that all of us as fans want our sport to recover its lost stature and are at odds as to which end of the cart the horse goes on.

Looking at the big picture, it seem to me that the sport came into its heydey, the 90's, by delivering product on the track first and foremost. People came to the track to see it. The media follows a crowd as sure as an ambulance chasing lawyer follows the police band. Sponsorship money follows where the media goes. Simplistic, I know, but hasn't it been proven time and again that the KISS principle works?

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 22:46

Waldo, you often have important and valid things to say in this forum. Why then, do you have to be such a ***** about it? The sarcasm and contempt drips from near every word your write. If you lost that attitude in your posts I think you'd find your information and opinion would quickly be respected and welcomed, if you cared to. If not, then never mind. ;)

Look I was there from 1997-2005 and was subject to many things. I know what happened, how it was done and how much it cost. I left because it got to expensive rebuilding things.

With respect to selling tickets and filling stands, it seems several folks here are posting opinions from different perspectives. Its one thing for a promoter to get his desired ticket sales. For him that's the end all, be all. (more or less) For a series owner, team owner and interested fan, full grandstands are a harbinger of profitability. You may sell 70,000 tickets, but if only 30-40,000 show up to the race, it looks bad in person AND ON TV!! Full stands and good tv ratings are the end all be all for team owners and series owners as that's what bring in sponsorship money, the lifeblood of the sport (these days).

Yes and no. All sports have problems. Look at Florida's baseball teams, both are playing well and drawing flies. Because of that we need to change Baseball? We must put thing in perspective. To build crowds you must have successful events from the bottom line point of view. This way you can build on it year after year after year. Ticket sales makes it profitable, not butts in the seats. Kansas being moved from Early July to April may have cost things a bit.

Another issue is there are X number of HARD CORE INDY/CC Fans. All estimates is that number is 600,000 in the U.S. There are Rubes that like the pretty cars and the noise they make but at a certain place and on lookers that are interested in checking things out. Promoters have been discussing and looking for the magic formula that gets all three to the track. No such formula exists.
A thing that moves a person to make the effort to go to the track varies with the person and the category they reside in. In some cases the most effective way of getting fans out is going door to door and personally inviting them and that is worth 3%. So to get the 30,000 you need to reach 1,000,000 people. How much did that cost to do? In Kansas City's case all they needed to reach was 70,000.
I have been studying the habits of fans for thirty years and there is a great excuse these days and have been for the last few years.

Tickets: $39.00 X 4= $136.00
Travel: 225 Miles one way= $215.00 X2 $430.00
Hotel: $150 per night 2 nights $300.00
Food/Drink: $150.00
Misc stuff for track: $100.00
Stuff bought at track: $50.00

$1166.00/4 or $291.50 per person

Turning on the TV and VCR/DVR: $1.00
Same four watching delayed after Soccer Practice: $0.25

These are old numbers. Now, put your think caps on and over come that? Race fans aren't stupid FREE compared to $300.00 the choice is simple.

CART saw this when they built temp courses. They did this for two reasons, get into markets they weren't in and bring the track to the people not making the people go to the track.
Bruton Smith said on WindTunnel he would love to do a race around Manhattan because he would have 7,000,000 people in the infield. Somehow they would end up paying something.

This issue as Starter put it about chicken/egg is for a show to be successful it must be to the track first or the promoter. The sanction needs to help but they do not know the internal costs of the facilities. They do know that if the track has a Cup date then many of their monthly costs for the year are more than covered. Thus the IRL, NCTS, ARCA and SCCA events become free to the track cost. The Kansas Weekend with NCTS/IRL/IPS cost less than $1,200,000 to do. Sold 70,000 for the trucks at $45.00 and the IRL for $39.00 that is $5,880,000 and they have had that money since the end of November so with Interest around $6,000,000 so they netted about $4,800,000 or about 5 months of costs and debt service.

Where is that at Long Beach? $14,000,000 in costs with sponsors and friends it is $10,500,000 with the IRL giiving them $4,000,000 (Purse Sanction) and we have $6,500,000 that needs to be made in 3 days. 50,000 for Friday at $25, 65,000 on Saturday at $50.00 and 75,000 on Sunday at $75.00 = $6,663,000. Add some other stuff they got $7,000,000 so all of that work to pocket $500,000.00

So in somes world $500,000 is better than $5,000,000. It is what it is and both are going to be on the series but Long Beach will not get much better and Kansas City can only get better from an appearance only.

So it comes down to pretty pictures or profits.

MDS

12th June 2008, 22:56

Breeze

12th June 2008, 23:20

............................They do know that if the track has a Cup date then many of their monthly costs for the year are more than covered. Thus the IRL, NCTS, ARCA and SCCA events become free to the track cost. The Kansas Weekend with NCTS/IRL/IPS cost less than $1,200,000 to do. Sold 70,000 for the trucks at $45.00 and the IRL for $39.00 that is $5,880,000 and they have had that money since the end of November so with Interest around $6,000,000 so they netted about $4,800,000 or about 5 months of costs and debt service........................................... ..........................So it comes down to pretty pictures or profits.
In essence, what you are saying is that the financially successful IRL races are subsidized by NASCAR profits.

What I'd like to point out is that NASCAR races have become ENORMOUSLY profitable because of the huge numbers of fans it draws to the track. These are the same kind of people who could be IRL fans. For NASCAR events many of them probably shell out a LOT more than $300 per person to attend an event. I'm guessing on this, help me out here.

The "happening" that is a NASCAR event is a "happening" because of the volume of people attending it in person. The media follows along to cover the "happening". Sponsorship money flows in because the ROI on that kind of exposure is an easy sell to the Board of Directors. But as you pointed out Waldo, a Cup date makes big money. The trick for IRL is to make their product as desireable to consumers as NASCAR is.

The races from CCWS/CART which have been a financial success, as limited as they might be, is because it is an EVENT, a "happening" that media and money is attracted to.

So the key to future IRL success, as I see it, is to first make the races an EVENT that people are willing to fork out their hard earned $300 to attend. Sell tickets, but GET BUTTS IN THE SEATS! A crowd draws a crowd. The media and money will follow. It always does.

So far the racing has been good. I haven't been to a race this season so I can't attest as to whether or not the EVENT has been attracitve enough to draw repeat customers. If not, that's the thing to fix first. Music, food and things to do. Every race weekend a carnival of entertainment. It doesn't have to be U2, Cirque du Soleil and Emeril Lagasse every weekend, just FUN with some great racing thrown in for good measure!

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 23:21

My two numbers were in fact in two paragraphs, its called reading comprehension.

Homestead is losing money and the attendance is greatly propped up by Malboro. They give away 30,000 tickets, or more and probably 20,000 show up. They don't buy the tickets they give away at anywhere near to full price, if anything they pay 25 cents on the dollar, likely less than that.

Oh yes the Marlboro tickets. The fact that a Ticket is a ticket doesn't matter to you. Marlboro started this in 1987 and continued this in CART until 2002. Yes, I worked this once in the CART days and they paid $10.00 over face due to Hospitality. Some were the best deal in town. The IRL deal is 10,000 tickets with all the "sponsors" using up the 10,000. Federal Law only allows Tobacco tickets to be mailed to the customer. Another one of "truths" spewed for years coming bouncing back. :p

Watkins Glen had sad attendance and painfully boring racing.

Makes money though. Is Leesa France Kennedy is screaming? Can't hear her.

Infenion loses money and is a bad show.

I am waiting for Bruton Smith to complain..........................

Belle Isle lost money and is heavily subsidized by tax payers money.

Actually I read it did ok. Of course it was in publications and such. Internet sources say otherwise.

This is the same arrangement that San Jose operated under. The only reason the SJGP was cancelled was because of construction that will be completed by 2009. It would make nice place to start off the season.

CART/CCWS writer John Oreovizc wrote months ago that San Jose is dead because the city got less revenue from that show than three other thing in town at the same time, one being a gem show and it smoked the GP. No of the others cost the the city a dime, the SJGP did to the tune of 40,000,000 dimes.

Racing in front of stands half filled with passive fans does nothing to support growth in Indy car, looks horrible on TV, and doesn't impress sponsors.

Do what I do, go to the races. It helps and then it doesn't look horrible on TV.

Michigan would have been on the schedule this year if Honda had agreed to move its date at Mid-Ohio back one week. You can chalk up that loss the the wonderful management of Mr. George.

Michigan wanted to get farther away from their August Cup date as it was hurting. Blame that on ISC. They actually wanted Nashville's date.

Homestead, Nahsville, Kansas and Chicago all provide average to dull racing and are losing money. They need to go.

Chicago is losing money. Do you just troll for a living or do you know something. Been to every race at Chicagoland. Even in 2006 in a cold rainy set up the crowd was twice as good as the last Milwaukee CCWS race and they claimed 31,000.

!!WALDO!!

12th June 2008, 23:37

In essence, what you are saying is that the financially successful IRL races are subsidized by NASCAR profits.

It is called survival of the track. Ontario anyone.

What I'd like to point out is that NASCAR races have become ENORMOUSLY profitable because of the huge numbers of fans it draws to the track. These are the same kind of people who could be IRL fans. For NASCAR events many of them probably shell out a LOT more than $300 per person to attend an event. I'm guessing on this, help me out here.

TV gives the tracks the following: 80% of the $5,500,000+ million, balance comes from Sprint and Event Sponsor.
Depending on the track the following estimated amounts on to of the above PER DATE:
Category A: Daytona $20,000,000
Category B: Indy $17,500,000
Category C: ISC Tracks: $10,000,0000
Category D: All others, $5,000,000

It subsidizes the survival of the facilities, nothing more or less. If Bruton wants to put on a Concert then the costs are paid for. Why is this a problem? Explain it too me. Notice a MIS gets $20,000,000 as their shows are no longer sell outs.

The "happening" that is a NASCAR event is a "happening" because of the volume of people attending it in person. The media follows along to cover the "happening". Sponsorship money flows in because the ROI on that kind of exposure is an easy sell to the Board of Directors. But as you pointed out Waldo, a Cup date makes big money. The trick for IRL is to make their product as desireable to consumers as NASCAR is.

Ever go to Chicagoland? It is almost as bad getting and out as the Cup Date.

Got an idea to make their product as desireable? Please share it. All I have read is get rid of this and that. Not one way to promote the product.

The races from CCWS/CART which have been a financial success, as limited as they might be, is because it is an EVENT, a "happening" that media and money is attracted to.

Which ones are those? Dover sold the LBGP because they began to lose money. GF and KK took it because nobody else did.

So the key to future IRL success, as I see it, is to first make the races an EVENT that people are willing to fork out their hard earned $300 to attend. Sell tickets, but GET BUTTS IN THE SEATS! A crowd draws a crowd. The media and money will follow. It always does.

Sell tickets when, 11 months in advance or on the day of the race.

So far the racing has been good. I haven't been to a race this season so I can't attest as to whether or not the EVENT has been attracitve enough to draw repeat customers. If not, that's the thing to fix first. Music, food and things to do. Every race weekend a carnival of entertainment. It doesn't have to be U2, Cirque du Soleil and Emeril Lagasse every weekend, just FUN.

Re-read the goal of reaching the different kind of fan. It isn't easy and as time goes on and gas goes up, you will see more and more empty but paid for seats at NASCAR races. Look at Martinsville about a 1/3 failed to show but those seats were sold.
Bad for the IRL/Good for NASCAR?

Breeze

12th June 2008, 23:58

Got an idea to make their product as desireable? Please share it. All I have read is get rid of this and that. Not one way to promote the product.

Funny you should say that...............

MDS

13th June 2008, 00:41

Re-read the goal of reaching the different kind of fan. It isn't easy and as time goes on and gas goes up, you will see more and more empty but paid for seats at NASCAR races. Look at Martinsville about a 1/3 failed to show but those seats were sold.

Uh, I was at Martinsville. I think it had far, far less to do with gas prices and much more to do with weather. The forcast called for something like a 90 percent chance of rain and darn cold temps. To call that race out as an example is just a massive, massive reach.

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 00:51

Uh, I was at Martinsville. I think it had far, far less to do with gas prices and much more to do with weather. The forcast called for something like a 90 percent chance of rain and darn cold temps. To call that race out as an example is just a massive, massive reach.

So you are making excuses for fans not showing up. Make some up for Kansas then. From the angles on TV it was missing a third. NOT CALLING IT just pointing that people bought tickets and elected not to go.

GOOD FOR NASCAR/BAD FOR THE IRL.

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 00:52

Funny you should say that...............

Give us one please.

indycool

13th June 2008, 02:01

MDS, I can say that WALDO's response is as good as any to your throw-it-at-the-wall-and-see-if-anything-bad-sticks stuff.

I might add a couple things. Belle Isle reportedly had something like $7 million in SPONSORSHIP going in. The deal with the city was a couple favors and moving a scheduled repaving on Belle Isle up a year which was already budgeted for. And the race was for local charity, like most pro golf tournaments and air shows. Penske was on Detroit's Super Bowl Committee and headed that race up as a community interest.

Don Listwin, the guy who lost his caboose on San Jose, can tell you why San Jose's a bad idea. Go call him.

You don't have a clue about Marlboro's deal at Homestead, nor any other sponsorship deal. (Oh, sponsorship? Isn't that a factor?) Every deal is different. You want program ads, signage, suites, seat tickets, title sponsorships, ID on ticket brochures, billboards at the track, etc., how much you want to do determines how much you spend. If it's as WALDO said and Marlboro paid $10 over face for tickets and got hospitality tossed in for "X," that's how a lot of these deals work.

To have a successful event, it MUST be financially solvent FIRST. Like I said, ask Don Listwin. Ask Dale Jensen about the $15 million he lost at Las Vegas.

I don't hear ANY of the IRL promoters bellerin' that they lost money. And I don't think the IRL will go into any deals with promoters and race concepts and venues it doesn't believe are sound in the first place.

MDS

13th June 2008, 03:52

If it's as WALDO said and Marlboro paid $10 over face for tickets and got hospitality tossed in for "X," that's how a lot of these deals work.

It's almost as if you don't actually know and are inventing facts up to back you're agenda that racing in front of people who don't actually want to pay for their tickets is a good thing.

I don't see you throwing out any facts. I see a lot of half-truths and straw man arguements.

Ask Dale Jensen about the $15 million he lost at Las Vegas.

That's a made up figure and a massive distortion of the truth. First of all, Dale Jensen had a partner, Bradley Yonover, so its hugely unlikely that Jensen bore all of the financial loss himself, but again you knew that right?

Also the LVGP and the GP of Pheonix were part of an LLC, which means Limited Liability Corporation, which did a lot to limit his personal losses. They also had investors, so all of the money that got put into the company wasn't Jensen's alone, so please explain to me how you deterimined that Jensen, and Jensen alone lost $15 million.

You fail to mention the primary reason the event loss money, and I heard it was far less than $15 million, is because their primary sponsor pulled out two months before the event. Why did you not mention that fact? Humm, because you have an agenda, and certian facts just don't fit into your agenda. Any major event that loses a title sponsor two months before the event is likely going to lose money.

Don Listwin, the guy who lost his caboose on San Jose, can tell you why San Jose's a bad idea. Go call him

So I suppose this means you know him personally and can give me his cell phone number? I'm a reporter and I am working on a cancer story for later in the year. He does a lot of work with the Canary foundation, so yeah I'd like to talk to him for a story and ask him a few questions about the SJGP.

You can PM me his contact information if you'd like. Or are your you just implying information and a relationship you don't actually have?

Also same thing with your over-simplifed comment about Jensen. Listwin had investors, and LLC protection. I doubt he lost as much as you would like to believe. He didn't "Lose his caboose." He might have lost a siziable investment, but certainally not his next egg. If you check ethics disclosures he's given at least $18,400 in campaign donations this year, so he has to be living fairly comfortable.

I don't think the IRL will go into any deals with promoters and race concepts and venues it doesn't believe are sound in the first place.

Really? A three race schedule sounds like a viable concept to you?

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 04:28

Not one fact but all things posted are wrong. Sounds like a troll to me.

The CCWS went out of business, the IRL is still around. My suggestion is go to your NASCAR races, enjoy them and remain clueless how NASCAR pockets million.

Is this a half truth or straw man arguement.

So you are making excuses for fans not showing up. Make some up for Kansas then. From the angles on TV it was missing a third. NOT CALLING IT just pointing that people bought tickets and elected not to go.

GOOD FOR NASCAR/BAD FOR THE IRL.

IT IS PHOENIX ALSO!

indycool

13th June 2008, 04:33

MDS:

1. Oh, now NONE of the people want to pay for tickets and go to the races, huh? Don't talk to me about half-truths.

2. Yes, I know about LLCs and Brad Yonover. I won't reveal sources on this one but I've heard as much as $19 million and SOMEBODY lost it. They lost enough that they canceled the Phoenix race. Lose a sponsor two months out? Baloney. They announced a sponsor (reportedly a ridiculous, screw-loose $5 million) of a vendor connected with VISA and when that rep got back to his office, his boss said, "what the h3ll are you doing?" and that was the end of that. Okay, $10m, $14m, pick your choose. It was enough they didn't run Phoenix. That oughta tell you something.

3. Nope, don't know Listwin at all. He hid awful quick though. And Canary Enterprises LLC, promoter of the first San Jose race, turned into San Jose Grand Prix LLC as the promoter of the second San Jose race. Meanwhile, the under-the-table deal SOMEONE did with Mayor Gonzales also changed when Chuck Reed, a councilman who voted under the gun AGAINST a subsidy for the race, was elected mayor and there was an indictment being pondered against Gonzales on another matter. Real solid deal.

4. Three IRL races are financially stable? That just comes out of the south end of a northbound bull. How many schedule changes do you see each year? If that were the case, it would be a lot. Maybe they can go to Ansan and Zhuhai and Jerez.

garyshell

13th June 2008, 04:39

Marlboro paid $10 over face for tickets and got hospitality tossed in for "X," that's how a lot of these deals work.

IC, I have a question about this and stand much more chance of getting a straight answer from you. If Marlboro ONLY bought the hospitality and other things but NOT the tickets what price would they have paid? And given that price, if you then add back in the cost they paid for the tickets how much over or under the face value would they have been? I am not asking for exact numbers, just a best guess. My point here is, sure you can say they paid over face value, but only if you ignore the discounted hospitality (and probably other) costs. This math, saying the tickets were OVER face value, appears to be just a case of moving costs from one category to another, i.e. discounting the hospitality to inflate the ticket price.

Gary

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 04:47

IC, I have a question about this and stand much more chance of getting a straight answer from you. If Marlboro ONLY bought the hospitality and other things but NOT the tickets what price would they have paid? And given that price, if you then add back in the cost they paid for the tickets how much over or under the face value would they have been? I am not asking for exact numbers, just a best guess. My point here is, sure you can say they paid over face value, but only if you ignore the discounted hospitality (and probably other) costs. This math, saying the tickets were OVER face value, appears to be just a case of moving costs from one category to another, i.e. discounting the hospitality to inflate the ticket price.

Gary

I worked this a posted this. This is the deal going back to the CART days. Marlboro mailed out tickets BY LAW and the upgraded a few to PADDOCK. They gid this at the Paper Clip. They mailed out 2000 and turned back in 2000 for resale and gave 50 paddocks away.
IRL has deals going with 5 or 6 sponsors to cover the 10,000 per race. MARLBORO is less than 2000 tickets and about 10% show up or at least that what it was at Chicago for CART.

The company buy a ticket for $110.00 and buy 2000 how much is it going to net cost them thanks to advertising write off?

$44000.00

indycool

13th June 2008, 04:58

Gary, first, it was WALDO who said that was the way the deal went, not me, but I DID say that deals are sometimes made that way. I do NOT know what Marlboro's deal is with Homestead. I DO know that these sponsor deals are worked creatively and are all different.

The accounting at a race track on these deals is impossible to track unless you're the GM or the bookkeeper. You add up what the sponsor wants and how much of it, maybe come up with a wholesale price instead of retail on SOME PARTS of the deal, then the check gets posted toward whatever the GM (or company) decides to post it under.

Very seldom (if ever, to my recollection) does a sponsor spend, say, $500,000 for title sponsorship to a race and nothing else is involved. And each thing has value. Sponsor might want race title, race presenting sponsor, program ad, tickets, a suite, track signage, ID everywhere, etc., or any combination or amount of 'em. Track wants cash, maybe ticket brochures available in the sponsor's local locations, tags on the sponsor's local advertising for the race. Plus what they both want to do as far as length of deal. Sometimes exclusivity in certain areas is tossed in, and has value.

There is a LOT of cross-promotion going on out there now. What's the deal with the Mrs. Butterworth syrup bottle talking on the GEICO TV commercial? I don't know, but I'd bet it's more than a couple bottles of syrup for the GEICO CEO's pancakes! :)

Bombardier, a Canadian company which builds airplanes among a lot of other big transportation things, is the sponsor of the pagoda at the Speedway, its biggest facility in the U.S. is in the DFW area, and it also sponsors the IRL race at Texas. The IRL has a Canadair regional jet, built by Bombardier, to transport its officials from Indy to race sites. What cash has gone where posted to what? I have no clue.

I would submit that there are probably quite a few people on the forums that might know a PIECE of this deal or that one, but probably just enough to be wrong because they don't have the whole thing. I hope this is the straight answer you wanted because ALL the details just never come out.

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 05:02

Very seldom (if ever, to my recollection) does a sponsor spend, say, $500,000 for title sponsorship to a race and nothing else is involved. And each thing has value. Sponsor might want race title, race presenting sponsor, program ad, tickets, a suite, track signage, ID everywhere, etc., or any combination or amount of 'em. Track wants cash, maybe ticket brochures available in the sponsor's local locations, tags on the sponsor's local advertising for the race. Plus what they both want to do as far as length of deal.

For accounting purposes and IRS, they need to get TICKETS. Those are receipts of goods basically.

indycool

13th June 2008, 05:10

I can't tell you how trades are done with the IRS, WALDO, but corporate and race track accountants know.

garyshell

13th June 2008, 06:22

I worked this a posted this. This is the deal going back to the CART days. Marlboro mailed out tickets BY LAW and the upgraded a few to PADDOCK. They gid this at the Paper Clip. They mailed out 2000 and turned back in 2000 for resale and gave 50 paddocks away.
IRL has deals going with 5 or 6 sponsors to cover the 10,000 per race. MARLBORO is less than 2000 tickets and about 10% show up or at least that what it was at Chicago for CART.

The company buy a ticket for $110.00 and buy 2000 how much is it going to net cost them thanks to advertising write off?

$44000.00

Huh? Ignoring all the typos etc. how does this even attempt to answer my direct question? If you don't discount the hospitality how much would the tickets then be worth? Certainly not ABOVE face value. The only way you can have the tickets appear to cost over face value is to include some of the OTHER costs as part of the ticket costs.

Gary

garyshell

13th June 2008, 06:29

indycool

13th June 2008, 11:56

Oh sure, Gary, they CAN buy a title sponsorship with nothing else but I've never seen a title sponsor which only wanted its name on a race and nothing else. A lot of people used to think that a title sponsor paid the purse and that's never been true. They require perks with value for their sponsorship and they get 'em. And yes, I agree, value assigned is value.....even including sampling rights, for example.

MDS

13th June 2008, 12:27

2. Yes, I know about LLCs and Brad Yonover. I won't reveal sources on this one but I've heard as much as $19 million and SOMEBODY lost it. They lost enough that they canceled the Phoenix race. Lose a sponsor two months out? Baloney. They announced a sponsor (reportedly a ridiculous, screw-loose $5 million) of a vendor connected with VISA and when that rep got back to his office, his boss said, "what the h3ll are you doing?" and that was the end of that. Okay, $10m, $14m, pick your choose. It was enough they didn't run Phoenix. That oughta tell you something.

So you're admiting you intentionally stated facts that you knew to be untrue and miscontruded the truth.

Three IRL races are financially stable? That just comes out of the south end of a northbound bull. How many schedule changes do you see each year? If that were the case, it would be a lot. Maybe they can go to Ansan and Zhuhai and Jerez.

I think you misunderstood my statement. I was reffering to the Micky Mouse three race schedule the IRL started with in 1996, never seemed like ending their season in May was a viable concept to me.

indycool

13th June 2008, 13:28

No, I don't admit that. I said call Jensen and he could tell you how much he lost. He was the point guy for the promoter/investors/whatever you want to call them.

'96? Long time ago.

And additional thinking on what WALDO says about Marlboro. Of true, that may show up on the books that way because of tobacco laws for some reason. And it may show up differently on Homestead's books than Marlboro's.

MDS

13th June 2008, 14:41

No, I don't admit that. I said call Jensen and he could tell you how much he lost. He was the point guy for the promoter/investors/whatever you want to call them.

Okay, I'm confused then because you said two different things. You said Dale Jensen lost $15 million, then you said an unknown sum of money between $5 million and $19 was lost by an unknown group of investors with limited liability, but you're sure someone lost something. So which is it?

Was your initial statement that Dale Jensen lost $15 million a lie, mistake or an intentional representation of the facts. You made up a figure and attributed as a loss to someone. I called you on it, and then you completely changed what it is you said.

I said call Jensen and he could tell you how much he lost. He was the point guy for the promoter/investors/whatever you want to call them.

No, you said, let me quote your exact words in case you forgot....

Ask Dale Jensen about the $15 million he lost at Las Vegas.

Fact is Dale Jensen didn't lose anywhere close to $15 million on the LVGP. Yet you claim to know about the workings of the LVGP and said matter of factly that he had in fact lost $15 million when you either didn't know, or intentionally lied.

Face it, you were caught in a lie to promote your agenda and got called on it. I call BS on all your non-attributed facts and source's you're unwilling to mention

indycool

13th June 2008, 14:50

Doesn't matter whether it was Jensen or his group. I said call Jensen. If he took it to mean how much he personally lost, he'd give you one answer. If he took it to mean (which I did) how much the race lost -- and he was the point guy -- he might give you another.

They an nounced a $5 million sponsor deal that was not done and not solid. If they lost $15-19 million, I said take that $5 million away from EITHER number and see what's left. What's left is lots of money down the ol' crapperoo.

I did NOT lie or intentionally mislead. Jensen was the visible moneybag for the race. Legally, I suppose it was an LLC. Practically speaking, he was a public figure, interviewed often, as the point guy for the show. If you want to know what the RACE lost, ask Jensen. Is that clear enough for you?

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 15:00

Not true at all. A company can buy the race title alone and not have to get a single ticket in order for the accountants and the IRS to deem the purchase as an expense. Receipt of intangibles, is every bit as valid as receipt of tangibles.

Gary

Really, Title sponsors have been receiving tickets for 30 years. It is very much a tangible because it is solely an advertising write off.
If a ticket's face value is $75.00, a TITLE SPONSOR pays upwards of $110.00. They get 5000 of them and pay $550,000 for that right. With that comes an ad or cover of the program, their name in the grass, other signage and hospitality. There is $175,000 to cover all of that. Since you appear to be interested in numbers. If we break this into quarters, the programs are around 8000, $43,750 or $5.47 per program. $43,750 to do the grass, to do the signage and that also to do hospitality.
The balance of the ticket goes to the track. If IRL or NASCAR, all of that money goes to remaining balance of the purse. These tickets look exactly the same and have section, row and seat numbers assigned but have a third stub. Hospitality.
Now follow me on this, this is where the real money comes in. These sponsors 30 days prior to the race turn back 4000 tickets. The track in 20 minutes takes off the Hospitality stub and offers them for resale at $75.00. This works only for Sprint Cup dates as the demand is so high. The track sells those tickets, best seats in the house for another $300,000. Thus the sponsorship deal becomes $850,000 costing the sponsor a net of $110,000.
Now the hospitality balances as only 75% take advantage of the free food and figures out to $58.33 per person so the track makes a little bit more.

Now the Marlboro tickets. It isn't only them, it is Honda, Firestone, 7-11 etc. They buy 10,000 tickets between them for every race. This practice was started in the mid 1980's in CART. The same holds true with NASCAR car sponsors to a lesser degree.
So Marlboro buy 2000 lets say for Chicagoland. My Ticket is $39.00 but not prime. Prime is S/F Line so is $50.00 they pay $10.00 for hospitality. This is taken care of by.......THE IRL or CART before. The FEDERAL LAW states the Marlboro can only distribute tickets based on a survey and by mail. So they give away those red Penske caps and get a mailing list. They distribute 400 tickets every race, one per address. The other 1600 tickets are sent back to the IRL and then to the track for internal distribution. (Charities or Resale)
This is true of all the companies doing this.
This money on the first round lowers the actual sanction fee. So a Sanction Fee of $3,700,000 gets lowered to by $1,700,000 for TV (ICS/IPS), $720,000 in this deal, misc sponsors (suppliers) $180,000 and an event sponsor brought in by the IRL of $550,000. Thus the final cost of the show is $550,000 less any track sponsors. Most will average about $275,000.

A Chicagoland for example does an ARCA show on Saturday at $45.00 per head and that show is covered to the tune of costing $125,000.
The whole weekend cost them $400,000 in sanction and that much in extra help. $800,000 and they have had banked since early November $6,500,000.
So another $125,000 in interest.

The way it works and has for years. CART lost this in the late 1990's and it drove the show cost to the promoter up and up.

Maybe someone should save this thread as it shows how this works.

MDS

13th June 2008, 16:05

Doesn't matter whether it was Jensen or his group.

I think it matters very much to the people involved whether one person took the loss or if it was spread between a number of partners and investors.

They an nounced a $5 million sponsor deal that was not done and not solid. If they lost $15-19 million, I said take that $5 million away from EITHER number and see what's left. What's left is lots of money down the ol' crapperoo.

I heard they loss $7 million on the race, much of that directly attribited to the loss of the title sponsorship they thought was sold.

Answer me this, if the race lost almost $20 million why was/is AGR interested in resurecting the LVGP? Are Michael Andretti and Kim Green massively stupid?

The idea that a race has to prove it can make a profit with an IRL race before actually being granted an IRL is just assinine. AGR took over Toronto, which loss money the last three years. With your maxim of only proven financially viable situations should be allowed to host races, Toronto should never be on the schedule.

indycool

13th June 2008, 16:21

1. It matters that the RACE (REPEAT "THE RACE") lost a lot of money.

2. I have not heard of AGR wanting to do this. Your was/is may mean they looked at it at one point and backed out. Then you have Las Vegas itself to deal with and the last I heard, it was an exploration of doing something around the Thomas and Mack Arena on the UNLV campus, by another party, which poses another set of problems. In the case of St. Petersburg, AGR did it right, lining up sponsors and the city altogether in advance before commitments were made and I expect they've done that due diligence in Toronto. The IRL is not going to want to put further poison in the water by taking "flyers" like CC did and come up with canceled races and leaving paper all over the place. There's no point in doing it if it stands a good chance of being a flop....for ANYBODY to do it.

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 17:55

The idea that a race has to prove it can make a profit with an IRL race before actually being granted an IRL is just assinine.

Interestingly as least 15 tracks were going to be built based on a NASCAR/CART date. None were granted in advance of construction thus none were built. You may not see it as the same but it is more or less exactly the same.

garyshell

13th June 2008, 18:41

For accounting purposes and IRS, they need to get TICKETS. Those are receipts of goods basically.

Not true at all. A company can buy the race title alone and not have to get a single ticket in order for the accountants and the IRS to deem the purchase as an expense. Receipt of intangibles, is every bit as valid as receipt of tangibles.

Gary

Really, Title sponsors have been receiving tickets for 30 years. It is very much a tangible because it is solely an advertising write off.

Just once, do you think you could possibly answer a simply question without all the obfuscaton and bluster? You said they NEED to get tickets to satisfy the IRS. I stated there was no need for those tickets as far as the IRS is concerned. (I know this for a fact as I help produce an event that sells similar rights and the purchaser certainly is able to take the amount as a business expense.) I did not say they don't get tickets or didn't want to get tickets or didn't need to get tickets for some other purpose. I clearly stated they don't need to get tickets to satisfy the IRS, period, no more no less. And then you take off on another of your rants about they have been receiving tickets for 30 years and then ramble on.

Please read my reponse again. Where did I say they didn't get tickets? Now please come back to the original statement you made. Where in the IRS regs does it in any way imply or state that tickets must accompany the purchase of the title rights in order for said purchase to be considered a business expense?

Gary

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 19:32

Just once, do you think you could possibly answer a simply question without all the obfuscaton and bluster? You said they NEED to get tickets to satisfy the IRS. I stated there was no need for those tickets as far as the IRS is concerned. (I know this for a fact as I help produce an event that sells similar rights and the purchaser certainly is able to take the amount as a business expense.) I did not say they don't get tickets or didn't want to get tickets or didn't need to get tickets for some other purpose. I clearly stated they don't need to get tickets to satisfy the IRS, period, no more no less. And then you take off on another of your rants about they have been receiving tickets for 30 years and then ramble on.

Please read my reponse again. Where did I say they didn't get tickets? Now please come back to the original statement you made. Where in the IRS regs does it in any way imply or state that tickets must accompany the purchase of the title rights in order for said purchase to be considered a business expense?

Gary

Not true at all. A company can buy the race title alone and not have to get a single ticket in order for the accountants and the IRS to deem the purchase as an expense. Receipt of intangibles, is every bit as valid as receipt of tangibles.

Gary

I thought you would be interested on how it was made to work by NASCAR, CART and the IRL.

Sorry I will not explain things any more except. AS A PROMOTER I HAD TO SHOW IN ACCOUNTING FOR THE IRS HOW THE TICKETS WERE DISTRIBUTED AND TO WHOM AND FOR WHAT. I HAD TO BACK IT UP IN LETTER FORM TO EACH SPONSOR HOW MANY TICKETS THEY RECEIVED.

Since this is a so called "CASH BUSINESS" things operate across the board differently than YOU THINK. Sorry for that.

-Helix-

13th June 2008, 20:54

Lets say the IRL does keep itself 80 percent oval, how does it market itself? NASCAR without fenders?

It tried that for 12 years and didn't work, no reason to think it will work now.

Didn't work? Back when the IRL was all ovals they saw their greatest popularity and success.

I think Gossage has a point, but I think a well balanced schedule can work too ala CART in the late 80's, early 90's.

IndyCar just needs to get people to realize that they race a whole series and not just one race. CART did a better job at that and thus why it saw more success.

Besides, what sport isn't a niche sport these days? Football is the only major sport in America now since the steroid problem in baseball and the rigged games in basketball. NASCAR is just seen as some weird redneck tradition of driving cars in circles to most Americans.

There's so many options for entertainment these days that very few products are going to have a mainstream image. NASCAR may be well known, but it's image is as much negative as it is positive and is still mostly a southern niche sport.

garyshell

13th June 2008, 21:01

For accounting purposes and IRS, they need to get TICKETS. Those are receipts of goods basically.

I thought you would be interested on how it was made to work by NASCAR, CART and the IRL.

Sorry I will not explain things any more except. AS A PROMOTER I HAD TO SHOW IN ACCOUNTING FOR THE IRS HOW THE TICKETS WERE DISTRIBUTED AND TO WHOM AND FOR WHAT. I HAD TO BACK IT UP IN LETTER FORM TO EACH SPONSOR HOW MANY TICKETS THEY RECEIVED.

Since this is a so called "CASH BUSINESS" things operate across the board differently than YOU THINK. Sorry for that.

I am sure you did have to make such an accounting to the IRS, but ONLY because tickets were part of your package. Not because the IRS required that tickets be part of the package. Which, as you can see from the above quote, is what you initially said.

You are not the only person here with experience with sponsorship of events and the IRS. So drop the condecension.

Gary

garyshell

13th June 2008, 21:09

indycool

13th June 2008, 22:03

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 23:39

!!WALDO!!

13th June 2008, 23:43

You're welcome, Gary....tried to be as honest as I could.

As far as accounting goes, I keep remembering Rio stiffing CART out of all fees on the last race there. For the public quarterly and annual report, they showed it as a "receivable," or an asset, rather than a loss and the report looked brighter when, in reality, it was left holding the bag. Creative accounting happens everywhere.

It has nothing to do with creative accounting it has to due with who is bring the money. I stated very clearly the sanction brings the sponsors. Part of the deal is the 10,000 tickets, part of the contract.

I am done with this thread, if I came back half as many times as these people with "what about this and that" I would have been banned.

Yet, they survive.

Amazing.

indycool

14th June 2008, 03:05

!!WALDO!!

14th June 2008, 03:32

WALDO, I've agreed with you through much of this exercise.

But the sanction doesn't NECESSARILY bring the sponsors. The sanction can bring a series sponsor. Teams bring sponsors. The tracks make their own deals with sponsors that have nothing to do with either of the others.

In this case it does. THESE ARE THE IRL SPONSORS. I had to supply tickets in exchange for promotional considerations to the sanction's sponsors in my life as a promoter. So HONDA, FIRESTONE, are not IRL Sponsors. Yes, I did get money in kind. (Reduction in Sanction Fee)

Follow me please, if this isn't done then the race cost, net, would go to a point that it is no longer priofitable. Sorry, the math works that way and one of the few things in the CART formula that actually worked.

10,000 tickets, 2,000 tickets, 100,000 tickets, no tickets, every ticket in the place can be part of ANY deal. The sanctioning body can't promise stuff it doesn't own unless it's "middlemanning" a deal for a track and a sponsor.

It is 10,000 tickets. How can the sanction not promise when it has the money already? Forget the track, the track is to pay a sanction fee of $3,700,000, They pay 25% or $925,000. The IRL has sponsors, TV and suppliers that cover all but $1,100,000. They bring to the track a Event Sponsor for $550,000. They refund after the event to the track, $375,000 and the deal is done. Is that any clearer? The SANCTION must make the track profitable, period.
Do you think that tracks would be doing well if they had to like Texas paid, $4,000,000 for 2 NNS races, $11,000,000 for 2 NSC races, $700,000 for NCTS and $3,700,000 for an IRL race? $19,400,000. Under the Sanctions help, the NNS races, $1,200,000, NSC races, $1,200,000, the NCTS, $300,000 and the IRL $550,000. $3,250,000 with $10,000,000 in NASCAR TV Revenue Sharing.
So the purses are paid with not one ticket sold and $6,750,000 in the bank PLUS not one of the FRIENDS OF THE TRACK Sponsors.

Without that involvement the tracks could not survive.

garyshell

14th June 2008, 04:43

I am sure you did have to make such an accounting to the IRS, but ONLY because tickets were part of your package. Not because the IRS required that tickets be part of the package. Which, as you can see from the above quote, is what you initially said.

You are not the only person here with experience with sponsorship of events and the IRS. So drop the condescension.

Really, so you have Promoted Races at the tune of 6 to 7 a year, gone out and got the sponsors, worked with the sanctions, found tracks, got people to come, paid the bills and ended up with ulcers and the runs. Then dealing with the government.

How did you like it? Got an idea, I do not get into your business do not tell me what I had to do is wrong. Are you aware the IRS has a number for AUTO RACING PROMOTERS?

Bet not.

Where did I say a word about promoting races? I said "experience with sponsorship of events and the IRS". Since when are races the only events that have sponsors and have to deal with the accounting to the IRS? I never once said what you had to do was wrong. I did say that your assertion that IRS requires that tickets be part of any sponsorship deal was wrong. You are the one who refuses to see the limited scope of my statement and wants to make it into something it is not.

One more time just so I can TRY to make this clear to you: although they are probably as rare as proverbial hens teeth it is possible to have a sponsorship deal that includes ZERO tickets. There is nothing in the IRS regulations to require tickets to be bundled with the sponsorship or any other deal. Now if there ARE tickets involved, then just as you had to do, every last one has to be accounted for.

Gary

!!WALDO!!

14th June 2008, 04:46

Where did I say a word about promoting races? I said "experience with sponsorship of events and the IRS". Since when are races the only events that have sponsors and have to deal with the accounting to the IRS? I never once said what you had to do was wrong. I did say that your assertion that IRS requires that tickets be part of any sponsorship deal was wrong. You are the one who refuses to see the limited scope of my statement and wants to make it into something it is not.

One more time just so I can TRY to make this clear to you: although they are probably as rare as proverbial hens teeth it is possible to have a sponsorship deal that includes ZERO tickets. There is nothing in the IRS regulations to require tickets to be bundled with the sponsorship or any other deal. Now if there ARE tickets involved, then just as you had to do, every last one has to be accounted for.

Gary

Your right, you know more than me so I am just wasting my time here.

indycool

14th June 2008, 13:18

!!WALDO!!

14th June 2008, 15:53

WALDO, read my post.

I said "middlemanning."

Sure, that can happen and I'd imagine it does quite often on the part of the sanctioning bodies. It could be part of say, a Honda's deal with ICS, that requires ICS to negotiate "X" perks from the promoter on its behalf at its own risk.

These deals just can work all sorts of ways.....or not work.

No middlemanning here, the track signs a contract with the sanction, the sanction in the contract, 10,000 to be paid for by sanction sponsors. IN RETURN that money is applied as a REDUCTION IN SANCTION FEE. Then the Sanction will take one of those sponsors and boost them to EVENT SPONSOR and that is 5000 tickets alone. Again it causes a REDUCTION IN SANCTION FEE.
There are no negotiations at this point, they have all been handled YEARS ago. The IRL took this from CART and even NASCAR has started doing this. This normally in their cases come from car/team sponsors as does the IRL and CART prior to that. In CART's day, If you had a $10,000,000 season Sponsor, $2,000,000 went to CART for this program. If you had a ride buying situation where money exchanged hands prior to races, then the Team pad ZERO.
As I have said the IRL is hitting up suppliers and some of the car sponsors for this money. The IRL has that money and the 25% of the Sanction Fee in January even for Chicagoland.

So a $3,700,000 Sanction fee becomes a final cost of $550,000 because of about $650,000 in sponsors money at every race. This is what started to kill CART, that money went away as did TV revenue and now a CART show went from about $600,000 to $1,200,000 to $2,500,000 NET COST.

This again has nothing to do with the track except the BOTTOM LINE. Thus an IRL show with low butt count still makes money. Even 10,000 at PIR actually made the track money, just not enough to continue.

The new economic racing package was started in 1983 and was very interesting to see work because PROMOTERS WERE HAPPY, if they are then the SHOW will continue.

With all of the BS here, Leesa France Kennedy, J.C. France and Bruton Smith are not whining, crying and throwing drooling fits because there are empty seats at an IRL race, they will if it becomes a habit for the Sprint Cup Races.