Wow, that's the worst idea I've heard in my life and betrays a very telling lack of understanding of what rally and indeed endurance motorsport is. People talk about the glory years of rally in the past - what was different, structurally, with the rallies then? Nothing (well, they were longer and even less accessible to a global audience).
Jan, I'm a media goon and I would never get behind such nonsense. These are advertising morons' fingerprints. People who look at everything as "markets" and "target audiences" and not people and events and passion. From a media perspective, when you have competition that is well presented in a clear, understandable way, in media that reaches as many people as possible, you have done your job. The appeal comes from seeing the amazing driving, landscapes, competition, endurance through adverse conditions, etc.
They don't do this to other motorsports with nearly century-long history. Tech regs and calendars are one thing. This ruins the nature of the competition. If you want a one day rally, or a one-stage rally, create your own competition. You could even run it alongside the "real" events... but then that's just a Power Stage though. If you must have "drama", the Power Stage concept is the best way to bring "drama" to the end of a multi-day rally if the result is otherwise pretty settled.
Just as an example of how incredibly stupid this system would be... Rally NZ 2010, one of the most dramatic rallies in recent years - you had 3+ guys fighting for the win on the last stage, 30km Whaanga Coast. If these idiots had their way back then, only 2 could fight for the win right? It would actually DECREASE the real drama and possibilities of the final stage in these kinds of situations, which are incidentally the moments everybody loves most about rally.
