Printable View
There is a limit to that evolution, a business model requiring faster and faster cars year after year after year is not sustainable, both from a cost and safety aspect. And before you (or anyone else) starts, spare me the "racing is supposed to be dangerous" nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneranger
Gary
Spot on Gary!
Some seem to have forgot Vegas....
The nice thing with Turbos is we should seee them dial up HP, now that they have gone with the lower downforce package on ovals.
Some of us are content with spec racing and .2 and some of us are not. Enjoy!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
But we can't, not right now. You failed to answer Gary's question: Where are you going to come up with the money??? Remember, the owners just fought tooth and nail to save $50K/entry. The Series has had layoffs….
I hate to repeat myself, but you keep referring to a time when we had multiple major sponsorships, four engine manufactures pumping technology and money in, multiple chassis manufacturers, and healthy TV ratings! New chassis/electronics/etcevery year! We had a lot of money to spend ($10-20 Million coming in for each entry).
You have said that faster/non-spec cars would bring fans back, and I showed you it didn't. You say the spec cars drove fans away, and I say the Split drove fans away. CART still had great looking fast cars…but it could not survive on looks and speed alone.
Because ofthe split;
We now we have a few major sponsors, two engines, one chassis and no TV ratings (save for Indy). We now take in about $3-5million/entry. It would take up too much space to list all the sponsors that are gone.
What we have now is a huge compromise, as a result of the Split. And when you have such a compromise, you can’tkeep everyone happy.
I think we need to work on thinking about how WE can help the TV ratings, because if we can help move this up, we’ll get a lot of the things back that we all miss and want!!!
The good news: We have a TV contract for all races through 2018 (ish). We have 25 entries heading into 2013 as of today. We do have turbo engines (which does allow for us to increase HP). We had eight different winners last year. We had an American win the championship. There were several others who could have won last year.
This is all a bit like poker. We’d all like to have a Royal Flush, but for now we have to play with the cards that we’ve been dealt.
Oh yeah, the numbers. Sure ,1994 RA race 70.000 people came to see Indycar race. 2013 and 79.000 twitter followers. I don't know was it bratwurst or the cars they came to see. Oh please, stop this bs, we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again. Spec racing? Thanks, I can watch that on local freeway for free all day long.Three wide, yippee!Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleEye
I think we were looking for the numbers for the 2000 Fontana race...you know, when the non-spec cars were there setting a closed course record?Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
And the fans certainly were not paying double to be at the race, or even watching ESPN for free..........
You also continue to fail and recognize the current economics.
I agree with you 100% that it would have been great to not have a Split and we could have carried on from 1994/1995. Review my posts from early 2000, and you might see I was banging the same drumb you are now.
It is sad, that comparison needs to be made from qualifying day in 2000 to same number of people on the race day now days isn't it? Product is not selling and it's not me as I already have tickets to see another sad Milwaukee Indy lights race with other few that are left. Instead you should remind you friends in the pits why things suck. Good day!Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleEye
I think everyone agrees with you....but no one has the money to change where we are at now. I'm glad you are going to Milwaukee....Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
That's it? That's your answer? In other words you have no numbers, you have no idea how to accomplish this pipe dream of expanded development and you don't think the racing was better last year than the previous five, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
I am still waiting for the numbers you talked about in the first post quoted above. Where are the numbers that show SPEED is the missing ingredient. Because that is what you said and the numbers shown re: RA don't prove that assertion at all. When you say "we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again", what exactly is the "it" you are referring to?Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
Gary
Sorry you right, must of been bratwurst then.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
So you are just going to continue to ignore questions to points you raise, and instead post silly answers? I still have no idea what the pronoun "it" referred to in the sentence quote above. And I still have no idea why you think SPEED was the reason there were 70,000 people at RA. I think it had a LOT more to do with competitive racing than just pure speed. I have suggested for years that no fan can tell a difference of 5 MPH from one year to the next at the same venue, without the use of a stop watch. I do think that they can easily tell the difference in a 50% increase in HP and 50% reduction in total downforce. Those two things combined would likely result in a reduction in lap speed, but an marked increase in racing excitement. And to me THAT is the missing piece.Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
Gary