TG pulls the offer.

[nanders]

Ask yourself why.

I like to ask myself, "why do you race?" I ask myself are both open wheel formulas obsolete? I ask myself will consolidation be enough?

I'm interested in seeing if TG introduces a new formula when they announce later this year. If it's not "new technology" it will be a loser.

[indycool]

nanders, it's hard to say the cars don't matter because a car doesn't go very
fast without a driver and a driver doesn't go very fast without a car.

But for the general spectator, he/she can't see "technology." If someone has a secret trick widget under the cowl that a secret engineer has developed in secret, the fan doesn't give a bleep. All he knows is "there goes Paul Tracy or Helio Castroneves down the straightaway."

The best example of this is the DP-01, which was promoted as the greatest thing that ever happened to motorsports as a come-on for people to jump on the CC bandwagon. Attendance, failed races and TV numbers said the DP-01 made absolutely no difference.

Racing is sports entertainment. The part the people watch is the racing part and they couldn't care less or notice the difference in an '86 March and an '07 Dallara or DP-01 go down the frontstretch at Indy side-by-side at 200 mph. More than that, they wouldn't care. They would care if Paul Tracy was in one and Marco Andretti was in the other one.

[garyshell]

So I say "oh" again. If editors at those sites bought into it..........has anyone ever seen a day by day breakdown? Has anyone ever put together independent media estimates day-by-day?

I'd extend that question to BOTH sides of the aisle. I'd like to see some REAL numbers from BOTH series.

Gary

[garyshell]

Jacques, the difference is that you don't hear boxcar numbers from the IRL that simply can't be believed.

Really? Now there is a leap of faith. What about the St. Pete numbers previously mentioned? Both sides are lying through their proverbial teeth. Neither can be trusted when it comes to the numbers. One inflates the numbers through the gate, the other touts the give away ticket numbers or includes bundled tickets without counting heads through turnstiles. Lies is lies.

Gary

[nanders]

nanders, it's hard to say the cars don't matter because a car doesn't go very
fast without a driver and a driver doesn't go very fast without a car.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for the driver. But AOWR is flat and to get all the old buzz back it will need to call on all the elements to make it great again. I personally don't think that's going to happen on the backs of new drivers alone. I don't think it's going to happen without a new formula that embraces a new form of propulsion. They will really need to shake this thing up if they have half a shot of recovering.

You have read me here before saying that they need to be all over the PR thing. Done massively it might get some new fans attention and might sell tickets. But you know successful racing enterprises need revenue from more sources then just prize money. They need manufacture support. And I don't mean just big auto. If they did go Hydrogen Electric they could also get the entrepreneurial HE companies too. Equallying "new blood."

But for the general spectator, he/she can't see "technology." If someone has a secret trick widget under the cowl that a secret engineer has developed in secret, the fan doesn't give a bleep. All he knows is "there goes Paul Tracy or Helio Castroneves down the straightaway."

When that turbine car whooshed by did they know? Do you remember the buzz when the turbine car came to Indy and the series? The new technology had buzz beyond where buzz had ever been in the series. Everyone I knew, knew about the turbine car. I would think if there was a Hydrogen Electric formula and new designs were coming from all over the place, you'd get that "turbine car buzz" all over again. It would be the place where proving the new technology happens! Isn't that what the car companies really want? A place where racing really translates into real world application?

The best example of this is the DP-01, which was promoted as the greatest thing that ever happened to motorsports as a come-on for people to jump on the CC bandwagon. Attendance, failed races and TV numbers said the DP-01 made absolutely no difference.

The DP01 is a horrible example ... It has a technology level somewhere around the 1989 Ferrari formula1 car. It was a sideways move at best. I think it was a step back because there was no oval package. Attendance failed because of many things including the spec formula is obsolete. What can you tell anybody about your "new" car in 2007 that has a very similar technology level to a 1989 F1 car?

Racing is sports entertainment. The part the people watch is the racing part and they couldn't care less or notice the difference in an '86 March and an '07 Dallara or DP-01 go down the frontstretch at Indy side-by-side at 200 mph. More than that, they wouldn't care. They would care if Paul Tracy was in one and Marco Andretti was in the other one.

I agree to a degree that people are passionate about the drivers but when I went to the IRL race at the Kansas Speedway this year (which was heavily attended ) I listened to the people around me and they were talking about car technology ..... from a different era , but they were.

You got to have the whole package. Putting those guys out there in a spec package or nearly spec package ain't gonna do it no matter how many series you combine into one. You need to get technology that has plenty of room to grow thrown in there too. That gets you the money, PR and synergy.

[indycool]

Gary, in general, so would I. But I disagree with your reason why you would like to see real IRL attendance numbers. People talk about free tickets. Relatively NONE are free. If Marlboro or Honda or some other sponsor makes a package deal with the promoter for tickets, hospitality, signage, a program ad and whatever else for "X" dollars, those tickets are paid for. They are NOT free.

nanders, sure the turbine car brought a lot of attention to things. That was a different era and a different economic structure than we are in today. And a different speed "target" that we are in today. OW organizations have been slowing the cars down by the rules for 30 years. One thing getting a lot of attention in IRL is running on ethanol and that Honda had no problem figuring out how to do it. THAT's something new. We can just agree to disagree on the importance of car technology, though.

[Jacques]

indycool : my point was that both series do it. To what extent or which one gets closer to the real number is not that important. The problem is that these issues are only pointed out when CC does it, not when the IRL does it.

How many show up at Texas ? Was the IRL able to save Fontana, Michigan or Milwaukee ? Have its 3 "original " road courses done any better than CC ? If you need to use CC as the yardstick to compare the IRL, then, well ... that is a problem !!!

Why, you ask ? I guess fot the same reason that TG's vision has changed over the years.

[garyshell]

Gary, in general, so would I. But I disagree with your reason why you would like to see real IRL attendance numbers. People talk about free tickets. Relatively NONE are free. If Marlboro or Honda or some other sponsor makes a package deal with the promoter for tickets, hospitality, signage, a program ad and whatever else for "X" dollars, those tickets are paid for. They are NOT free.

But counting the number of giveaway tickets or those bundled as part of a NASCAR ticket purchase as if they are eyeballs through the turnstiles is as fallacious as inflated numbers used by OWRS on occasion.

I never suggested those tickets didn't represent money in the promoters pocket (albeit at a significant discount). I am saying though, that using them as a head count is incorrect.

Gary

[Alexamateo]

An important point.
The key question is would the person attending have been there if they had to buy the ticket. I go to one or two baseball games a year. I don't particularly like baseball, but I get free tickets. I would not go if I had to pay for them.

There is one point I would like to add to this.

The only time I have ever been "in" racing was in college when I interned in public relations at Lowes (then Charlotte) Motor Speedway. This was when Eddie Gossage was in charge of PR there. They made more profit from concessions and souveniers than any other department. To them, the most important thing was to get people through the gate, how much or who paid for the ticket was almost irrelevent.

Gotta get 'em in the gate first in order to sell 'em a $6 beer

[indycool]

Understand what you're saying, Gary......the NFL had a system a few years ago (and maybe MLB if I remember right) that listed both buns on the boards and no-shows, two separate figures.