What Happens Next?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

To be fair, SCCA ran it into the ground before PG got his hands on it. He just finished the job.

---

Damn skippy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heelntoe

Starter. I respect you, even when you slap me on the wrist :) , but respectfully, PG had the opportunity to make it work and his actions killed it...much the way we now see CCWS dying a slow death. the difference with PG was that he changed rules mid-stream, messed with great talent like Boris Said and Tommy Kendall and basically acted like it was his own plaything, which he could drive in and win whenever he wanted to..TB, you wanna' chime in here?

---

This is basically a longer way of saying what Starter said, isn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sanguin

Careful, you could be talking about another series too. They are not the same at all, CC has their own engines and does not rely on manufacturer support. This is why they won't fail.

---

Huh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

Please name ONE top level series that has ever survived without manufacturer involvement.

Gary

---

What he said.

But there is a flip side to this, manufacturer involvement can be a killer too. Many still feel that the Penske Sunoco Porsche 917 driven by the late great Mark Donahue killed Can-Am racing in 1973. When the manufacturers get involved and the series can maintain a fairly even playing field, the series can be very successful. NASCAR has been able to maintain this delicate balance for decades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

Please name ONE top level series that has ever survived without manufacturer involvement.

Gary

---

When a series depends on manufacturer support for its engines and cars, they run the risk of failure if those manufacturers pull out,like trans-am.

CC owns their engine manufacturer[cosworth) and their cars, they do not have that risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pits4me

Utter nonsense pvt. If returning champion Brian Simo couldn't get a factory ride do you really think Trans-Am was in a position to be saved? When the early signs of struggle for title sponsorship surfaced, Claggett's group had to make a business decision and concentrate on ALMS.

For many in the paddock, they were happy the five time champion Gentilozzi stepped up to try to save the series. It was more of an emotional decision by PG in my opinion. The only similarity between that and CC is the fact there are still outside forces trying to undermine the motor racing market in North America for their own benefit.

Now they have JPM, AJ and JV at Talladega this weekend. Add Sam Hornish and Dario in 2008. Relentless pursuit of killing the "competition" is an understatement. That's why CC has taken the fight offshore.

---

I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sanguin

When a series depends on manufacturer support for its engines and cars, they run the risk of failure if those manufacturers pull out,like trans-am.

CC owns their engine manufacturer[cosworth) and their cars, they do not have that risk.

---

I understand your point. But whether it's auto manufacturer support (used to lease engines and purchase chassis), or it's sponsor funding, I'm not sure that I understand how not having the support of one or more sectors of sponsorship is a good thing.

One point you may be making is the power that the auto manufacturers tried to wield in the paddock. And that is an important point to remember. But the series hasn't become organized enough to create the sort of commercial value that consumer level sponsors are seeking... so now they seem to be leaving or avoiding CCWS too.

Apologies to George Lopez, but we seem to be stuck with FERA (instead of FEMA) to get drivers for us. FERA: Find Every Ride-buyer Available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

I understand your point. But whether it's auto manufacturer support (used to lease engines and purchase chassis), or it's sponsor funding, I'm not sure that I understand how not having the support of one or more sectors of sponsorship is a good thing.

One point you may be making is the power that the auto manufacturers tried to wield in the paddock. And that is an important point to remember.

---

Thanks, That was my point. CC has their own engines and cars as opposed to a series that depends on manufacturers to supply them. If they leave, the series dies, CC will not.

I agree it is better to have manufacturer support than not, and CC needs that. Just saying it isn't the death blow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

Please name ONE top level series that has ever survived without manufacturer involvement.

Gary

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sanguin

When a series depends on manufacturer support for its engines and cars, they run the risk of failure if those manufacturers pull out,like trans-am.

CC owns their engine manufacturer[cosworth) and their cars, they do not have that risk.

---

Wow really, having attended the original Can-Am series or IMSA I never would have know that? :rolleyes: Did you come up with that all by yourself?

Where in my statement did I say ANYTHING about dependence. I said INVOLVEMENT. And I await your answer, name ONE top level series that has survived without the INVOLVEMENT of the manufacturers.

Gary

Well, what do you mean by involment - beacause somebody must manufacture the cars (and engines) and he becomes involved :) .