Which rally should they add to the WRC-calendar?

Is there much point going where a perceived market exists for the cars if no fans turn up to the events?

The events have to make money to be viable for the local organizers, bills need paying etc.

I can't see manufacturers selling many news cars on half-an-hours TV footage shown at non-peak times, sometimes, maybe or not at all as is the case in the UK either.

It seems to me the selling of cars was left behind when the Japanese manufactures left the championship. It's now about the excitement and linking that to the sponsors branding more than the specific model of car involved? Particularly as show room cars have no relation to the competition cars at all. At least that is how I see it, though just an opinion, I could be miles off the mark.

But take for example Red Bull, do the Air Races sell Edge 540 planes to pilots, or is it really just a branding exercise for Red Bull?

Very valid point there Sprocket :)

People are not buying road cars based on rallying anymore, as the World Rally Car you see rallying has nothing to do with the road car.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by navtheace

Very valid point there Sprocket :)

People are not buying road cars based on rallying anymore, as the World Rally Car you see rallying has nothing to do with the road car.

---

Yeah, group B's were very similar to the road cars too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommeke_B

Yeah, group B's were very similar to the road cars too...

---

:D May be except AUDI.... and may be except S1 E2 :D

I don't think rally was about selling specific car models in Group B days, or even before. This is why I'm not sure why there is a big link in this thread to the WRC going to perceived markets for the manufactures products. It is not the model it is the associations, winning rally Russia would not in my mind lead to VW selling boat loads of Polo in Russia.

Lancia Stratos and most group B cars were almost impossible to buy

Quattro, Escort, Mini rally success probably did sell cars

Lancia Integrale, Evo and Impreza - probably rally helped with sales to a select market as the showroom models were at least relatives of competition cars.

As pointed out many rally cars have almost no relation to production models. But I do think at one time association with rally of names like Ford/Lancia/Audi sold cars. These days I feel the emphasis has shifted a lot away from this towards sponsors branding. I guess it would take Citroen to come on here and say, no we sell thousands of DS3 in 2012 because of Loeb's rally success, to show otherwise. Though I think car markets are much more subtle these days than for people to be influenced much by rally success when making a purchase. If Citroen are selling a lot of DS3 it is because the road version ticks the right boxes in the mind of potential customers, not the rally success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprocket

These days I feel the emphasis has shifted a lot away from this towards sponsors branding. I guess it would take Citroen to come on here and say, no we sell thousands of DS3 in 2012 because of Loeb's rally success, to show otherwise. Though I think car markets are much more subtle these days than for people to be influenced much by rally success when making a purchase. If Citroen are selling a lot of DS3 it is because the road version ticks the right boxes in the mind of potential customers, not the rally success.

---

It doesn't hurt to have a good car and rally success. The Impreza did when I bought my first one, and after owning it for five years when I needed a new car there wasn't much debate for a replacement.

When I was young in the 80s my parents had two Hondas and we'd watch F1 wanting Hondas to win, no matter if they were sponsored by Marlboro, Camel, Canon, or what. Granted it helped that they were winning thanks to Mansel, Prost and Senna, but we'd also want Nakajima to do just as well if possible. I don't root for Abu Dhabi's Department of Tourism or Red Bull (though I suppose I am a fan of Castrol), and I'm still as focused on the maker as the driver, though there are plenty of colorful fellows to watch. I still liked McRae after he moved to Ford but I sure didn't want him to beat Richard Burns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregor-y

It doesn't hurt to have a good car and rally success. The Impreza did when I bought my first one, and after owning it for five years when I needed a new car there wasn't much debate for a replacement.

When I was young in the 80s my parents had two Hondas and we'd watch F1 wanting Hondas to win, no matter if they were sponsored by Marlboro, Camel, Canon, or what. Granted it helped that they were winning thanks to Mansel, Prost and Senna, but we'd also want Nakajima to do just as well if possible. I don't root for Abu Dhabi's Department of Tourism or Red Bull (though I suppose I am a fan of Castrol), and I'm still as focused on the maker as the driver, though there are plenty of colorful fellows to watch. I still liked McRae after he moved to Ford but I sure didn't want him to beat Richard Burns.

---

In a way that is what I'm getting at. You have your associations that go way beyond any sponsor branding. I don't follow rally to see the Red Bull logo either! But how does that work in a country with no established rally tradition or associations with the manufacturers involved. To me it doesn't. How is it working with zero media coverage in the UK also. I'm a fan and I'm having to resort to Youtube to follow the WRC this year.

Even in motorsport circles I'm meeting few people who now follow the WRC, so I'm struggling to see how they can be getting to Joe Public in the established regions now and then wondering what is the logic behind taking the WRC into new countries. It seems they can't be influencing the mass market for the cars through the WRC hardly at all in the established regions the way things are. I'm no genius but if this doesn't bother the marketing people I can only assume their agenda lies elsewhere.

As I said above I could be well off the mark, but it just seems it is going this way to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallying UK

I dont think for one moment though that the "market" for rallying is a determinate factor in choosing where an WRC event is held.

---

Of course it is. And if it's not, it should be!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by &quot

Ultimately, its manufacturers that keep WRC on the road

---

Only because that's the current thinking. It could just as easily be a very successful privateer competition with manufacturers only involvement being the homologation of suitable vehicles. In fact, it would likely be a better contest if it was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by &quot

India and Russia cannot be discounted. There are simply too many 'European' rounds.

---

India certainly could. And the WRC has gotten along just fine without going near Russia. The WRC could survive very well without leaving European shores.


What you are confusing yourself with is the power of 'presence'. There isn't any ... unless the activity has significant following.
If a sport is not strong in any given country, the local media will not go near it. The reality of today is that there is so much money invested
in the popular sports in a region that the media focus their attention where the advertising dollar is.

To use India as an example, they are cricket and hockey mad. The WRC could come and go without causing a ripple. The local media would pay it no
attention whatsoever.
There is so much more benefit for marketeers by focussing their attention and resources in quality events which have a historic worldwide following.

Sprocket is on the money!

There is a way to turn this on its head.

I'm just going to concentrate on the Manufacturers Championship as the topic of where rally should be held has been linked with selling cars. I appreciate it has been punctuated in the past if not in recent history by the drivers titles using different machinery.

So what has the WRC been in the eyes of manufacturers?

Take from 1973 to 1991 we have European manufacturers demonstrating their prowess, engineering ability and for a short stage with group B the fact they can be just as bonkers as us fans! Seriously though a very European flavour with Lancia topping the list most regularly, then Fiat, Audi, Peugeot, Ford, Alpine-Renault in the mix.

Things changed in 1993 with Toyota taking the title followed by a further 6 years of Japanese domination. So the period 1993 to 1999 had two effects. The first is it did a lot to sell Japanese performance cars in Europe and parts of the rest of the world. The second, it raised the profile of Rally and particularly the WRC as a sport in Japan. This is how to generate presence in a country.

1999 saw a return to European domination, Citroen then Peugeot dominating the Manufactures titles, with a couple of notable titles for the Ford Focus WRC.


So my point? What is being discussed is how to take the WRC to the BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, China and lets throw in South Africa too).

Perhaps the question should be how to attract the BRICs manufacturers to the WRC. Try convincing them it is an ideal platform to raise their profile within Europe. That way if it happened and they won titles, the presence in those countries would be formed. The people of those countries would start to follow the WRC, only then does it make sense to take the events to them.

Sadly though I don't think this would be on the agenda, going back to my earlier points regarding the Championship being more a branding exercise these days.

I don't think VW for example will be more interested of promotion in Brasil & Russia regarding WRC. In Brasil they have long going presence with a factory there producing Beetles for many years. In Russia I think there is separate motorsport brand which develop cars of other classes than WRC and probably the promotion there will be with these classes. I have no idea for India & China though. Probably for China would be more important races like Silk Road.